T he United States has pursued empire since early in its history, but it was the Soviet collapse in 1991 that enabled Washington to see the entire world as its oyster.

The collapse of the Soviet Union resulted in the rise of the neoconservatives to power and influence in the US government. The neoconservatives have interpreted the Soviet collapse as History’s choice of “American democratic capitalism” as the New World Order.

Chosen by History as the exceptional and indispensable country, Washington claims the right and the responsibility to impose its hegemony on the world. Neoconservatives regard their agenda to be too important to be constrained by domestic and international law or by the interests of other countries. Indeed, as the Unipower, Washington is required by the neoconservative doctrine to prevent the rise of other countries that could constrain American power.

Paul Wolfowitz, a leading neoconservative, penned the Wolfowitz Doctrine shortly after the Soviet collapse. This doctrine is the basis of US foreign and military policy.

The doctrine states:

“Our first objective is to prevent the re-emergence of a new rival, either on the territory of the former Soviet Union or elsewhere, that poses a threat on the order of that posed formerly by the Soviet Union. This is a dominant consideration underlying the new regional defense strategy and requires that we endeavor to prevent any hostile power from dominating a region whose resources would, under consolidated control, be sufficient to generate global power.”

Notice that Washington’s “first objective” is not peace, not prosperity, not human rights, not democracy, not justice. Washington’s “first objective” is world hegemony. Only the very confident so blatantly reveal their agenda.

As a former member of the Cold War Committee on the Present Danger, I can explain what Wolfowitz’s words mean. The “threat posed formerly by the Soviet Union” was the ability of the Soviet Union to block unilateral US action in some parts of the world. The Soviet Union was a constraint on US unilateral action, not everywhere but in some places. Any constraint on Washington is regarded as a threat.

A “hostile power” is a country with an independent foreign policy, such as the BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa) have proclaimed. Iran, Bolivia, Ecuador, Venezuela, Argentina, Cuba, and North Korea also proclaim an independent foreign policy.

This is too much independence for Washington to stomach. As Russian President Vladimir Putin recently stated, “Washington doesn’t want partners. Washington wants vassals.”

The Wolfowitz doctrine requires Washington to dispense with or overthrow governments that do not acquiesce to Washington’s will. It is the “first objective.”

The collapse of the Soviet Union resulted in Boris Yeltsin becoming president of a dismembered Russia. Washington became accustomed to Yeltsin’s compliance and absorbed itself in its Middle Eastern wars, expecting Vladimir Putin to continue Russia’s vassalage.

However at the 43rd Munich Conference on Security Policy, Putin said: “I consider that the unipolar model is not only unacceptable but also impossible in today’s world.”

ORDER IT NOW

Putin went on to say:
“We are seeing a greater and greater disdain for the basic principles of international law, and independent legal norms are, as a matter of fact, coming increasingly closer to one state’s legal system. One state and, of course, first and foremost the United States, has overstepped its national borders in every way. This is visible in the economic, political, cultural and educational policies it imposes on other nations. Well, who likes this? Who is happy about this?”

When Putin issued this fundamental challenge to US unipower, Washington was preoccupied with its lack of success with its invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq. Mission was not accomplished.

By 2014 it had come to Washington’s attention that while Washington was blowing up weddings, funerals, village elders, and children’s soccer games in the Middle East, Russia had achieved independence from Washington’s control and presented itself as a formidable challenge to Washington’s uni-power. Putin blocked Obama’s planned invasion of Syria and bombing of Iran.
The unmistakable rise of Russia refocused Washington from the Middle East to Russia’s vulnerabilities.

Ukraine, long a constituent part of Russia and subsequently the Soviet Union, was split off from Russia in the wake of the Soviet collapse by Washington’s maneuvering. In 2004 Washington had tried to capture Ukraine in the Orange Revolution, which failed to deliver Ukraine into Washington’s hands. Consequently, according to neocon Assistant Secretary of State Victoria Nuland, Washington spent $5 billion over the following decade developing Ukrainian non-governmental organizations (NGOs) that could be called into the streets of Kiev and in developing Ukrainian political leaders willing to represent Washington’s interests.

Washington launched its coup in February 2014 with orchestrated demonstrations that, with the addition of violence, resulted in the overthrow and flight of the elected democratic government of Victor Yanukovych. In other words, Washington destroyed democracy in a new country with a coup before democracy could take root.

Ukrainian democracy meant nothing to Washington. Washington was intent on seizing Ukraine in order to present Russia with a security problem and also to justify sanctions against “Russian aggression” in order to break up Russia’s growing economic and political relationships with Europe. Washington feared that these relationships could undermine Washington’s hold on Europe.

Sanctions are contrary to Europe’s interests. Nevertheless European governments accommodated Washington’s agenda. The reason was explained to me several decades ago by my Ph.D. dissertation committee chairman who became Assistant Secretary of Defense for International Security Affairs. I had the opportunity to ask him how Washington managed to have foreign governments act in Washington’s interest rather than in the interest of their own countries. He said, “money.” I said, “you mean foreign aide?” He said, “no, we give the politicians bags full of money. They belong to us. They answer to us.”

Recently, the German journalist Udo Ulfkotte wrote a book, Bought Journalists, in which he reported that every significant European journalist functions as a CIA asset.

This does not surprise me. The same is the situation in the US.
As Europe is an appendage of Washington, a collection of vassal states, Europe enables Washington’s pursuit of hegemony even to the extent of being driven into conflict with Russia over a “crisis” that is entirely a propaganda creation of Washington’s.

ORDER IT NOW

The media disguises the reality. During the Clinton regime, six mega-media companies were permitted to acquire 90% of the US print, TV, radio, and entertainment media, a concentration that destroyed diversity and independence. Today the media throughout the Western world serves as a Propaganda Ministry for Washington. The Western media is Washington’s Ministry of Truth. Gerald Celente, the trends forecaster, calls the Western media “presstitutes,” a combination of press prostitutes.

In the US Putin and Russia are demonized around the clock. Every broadcast alerts us to “the Russian threat.” Even Putin’s facial expressions are psychologically analyzed. Putin is the New Hitler. Putin has ambitions to recreate the Soviet empire. Putin invaded Ukraine. Putin is going to invade the Baltic states and Poland. Putin is a threat on the level of ebola and the Islamist State. US Russian experts, such as Stephen Cohen, who state the facts are dismissed as “Putin apologists.” Any and every one who takes exception to the anti-Putin, anti-Russian propaganda is branded a “Putin apologist,” just as 9/11 skeptics are dismissed as “conspiracy theorists.” In the Western world, the few truth-tellers are demonized along with Putin and Russia.

The world should take note that today, right now, Truth is the most unwelcome presence in the Western world. No one wants to hear it in Washington, London, Tokyo, or in any of the political capitals of Washington’s empire.

The majority of the American population has fallen for the anti-Russian propaganda, just as they fell for “Saddam Hussein’s weapons of mass destruction,” “Assad’s use of chemical weapons against his own people,” Iranian nukes,” the endless lies about Gaddafi, 9/11, shoe bombers, underwear bombers, shampoo and bottled water bombers. There is always a new lie to keep the fear factor working for Washington’s endless wars and police state measures that enrich the rich and impoverish the poor.
The gullibility of the public has enabled Washington to establish the foundation for a new Cold War or for a preemptive nuclear strike on Russia. Some neoconservatives prefer the latter. They believe nuclear war can be won, and they ask, “What is the purpose of nuclear weapons if they cannot be used?”

China is the other rising power that the Wolfowitz Doctrine requires to be constrained. Washington’s “pivot to Asia” creates new naval and air bases to control China and perpetuate Washington’s hegemony in the South China Sea.

We come to the bottom line. Washington’s position is not negotiable. Washington has no interest in compromising with Russia or China. Washington has no interest in any facts. Washington’s deal is this: “You can be part of our world order as our vassals, but not otherwise.”
European governments and, of course, the lapdog UK government, are complicit in this implicit declaration of war against Russia and China. If it comes to war, Europeans will pay the ultimate price for the treason of their leaders, such as Merkel, Cameron, and Hollande, as Europe will cease to exist.

ORDER IT NOW

War with Russia and China is beyond Washington’s capability. However, if the demonized “enemy” does not succumb to the pressure and accept Washington’s leadership, war can be inevitable. Washington has launched an attack. How does Washington back off? Don’t expect any American regime to say, “we made a mistake. Let’s work this out.” Every one of the announced candidates for the American presidency is committed to American hegemony and war.

Washington believes Russia can be isolated from the West and that this isolation will motivate those secularized and westernized elements in Russia, who desire to be part of the West, into more active opposition against Putin. The Saker calls these Russians “Atlanticist integrationists.”

After two decades of Russia being infiltrated by Washington’s NGO Fifth Columns, the Russian government has finally taken action to regulate the hundreds of Western-financed NGOs inside Russia that comprise Washington’ subversion of the Russian government. However, Washington still hopes to use sanctions to cause enough disruption of economic life within Russia to be able to send protesters into the streets. Regime change, as in Ukraine, is one of Washington’s tools. In China the US organized the Hong Kong “student” riots, which Washington hopes will spread into China, and Washington supports the independence of the Muslim population in the Chinese province that borders Kazakhstan.

The problem with a government in the control of an ideology is that ideology and not reason drives the action of the government. As the majority of Western populations lack the interest to search for independent explanations, the populations impose no constraint on governments.
To understand Washington, go online and read the neoconservative documents and position papers. You will see an agenda unconstrained by law, by morality, by compassion, by common sense. You will see an agenda of evil.

Who is Obama’s Assistant Secretary of State for the Ukrainian part of the world? It is the neoconservative Victoria Nuland who organized the Ukrainian coup, who put in office the new puppet government, who is married to the even more extreme neoconservative, Robert Kagan.

Who is Obama’s National Security advisor? It is Susan Rice, a neoconservative.

Who is Obama’s Ambassador to the UN? It is Samantha Power, a neoconservative.

Now we turn to material interests. The neoconservative agenda of world hegemony serves the powerful military/security complex whose one trillion dollar annual budget depends on war, hot or cold.

The agenda of American hegemony serves the interests of Wall Street and the mega-banks. As Washington’s power and influence spreads, so does American financial imperialism. So does the reach of American oil companies and American agribusiness corporations such as Monsanto.

Washington’s hegemony means that US corporations get to loot the rest of the world.

The danger of the neoconservative ideology is that it is in perfect harmony with powerful economic interests. In the US the left-wing has made itself impotent. It believes all the foundational government lies that have given America a police/warfare state incapable of producing alternative leadership. The American left, what little remains, for emotional reasons believes the government’s 9/11 story. The anti-religious left-wing believes the threat posed to free thought by a Christian Russia. The left-wing, convinced that Americans are racists, believes the government’s account of the assassinations of Martin Luther King.

ORDER IT NOW

The left-wing accepts the government’s transparent 9/11 fable, because it is emotionally important to the American left that oppressed peoples strike back. For the American left, it is emotionally satisfying that the Middle East, long oppressed and exploited by the French, British and Americans, struck back and humiliated the Unipower in the 9/11 attack.

This emotional need is so powerful for the left that it blinds the left-wing to the improbability of a few Saudi Arabians, who could not fly airplanes, outwitting not merely the FBI, CIA, and NSA, which spies on the entire world, but as well all 16 US intelligence agencies and the intelligence agencies of Washington’s NATO vassal states and Israel’s Mossad, which has infiltrated every terrorist organization, including those created by Washington itself.

Somehow these Saudis were able to also outwit NORAD, airport security, causing security to fail four times in one hour on the same day. They were able to prevent for the first time ever the US Air Force from intercepting the hijacked airliners. Air traffic control somehow lost the hijacked airliners on radar. Two airliners crashed, one into the Pennsylvania country side and one into the Pentagon without leaving any debris. The passport of the leader of the attack, Mohammed Atta was reported to be found as the only undamaged element in the debris of the World Trade Center towers. The story of the passport was so preposterous that it had to be changed.

This implausible account did not raise any eyebrows in the tame Western print and TV media.

The right-wing is obsessed with immigration of darker-skinned peoples, and 9/11 has become an argument against immigration. The left-wing awaits the oppressed to strike back against their oppressors. The 9/11 fable survives as it serves the interests of both left and right.

I can tell you for a fact that if American national security had so totally failed as it is represented to have failed by the official explanation of 9/11, the White House, the Congress, the media would have been screaming for an investigation. Heads would have rolled in agencies that permitted such massive failure of the national security state. The embarrassment of a Superpower being so easily attacked and humiliated by a handful of Arabs acting independently of any intelligence agency would have created an uproar demanding accountability.

Instead, the White House resisted any investigation for one year. Under pressure from the 9/11 families who lost family members in the World Trade Center Towers, the White House created a political commission consisting of politicians managed by the White House. The commission sat and listened to the government’s account and wrote it down. This is not an investigation.
In the United States the left-wing is focused on demonizing Ronald Reagan, who had nothing whatsoever to do with any of this. The left-wing hates Reagan because he had to use anti-communist rhetoric in order to keep his electoral basis while he strove to end the Cold War in the face of the powerful opposition of the military/security complex.

ORDER IT NOW

Is the left-wing more effective in Europe? Not that I can see. Look at Greece for example. The Greek people are driven into the ground by the EU, the IMF, the German and Dutch banks and the New York hedge funds. Yet, when presented with candidates who promise to resist the looting of Greece, the Greek voters give the candidates a mere 36% of the vote, enough to form a government, but not enough to have any clout with creditors.

Having hamstrung their government with such low electoral support, the Greek people further impose impotence on their government by demanding to remain in the EU. If leaving the EU is not a realistic threat, the Greek government has no negotiating power.

Obviously, the Greek population is so throughly brainwashed about the necessity of being part of the EU that the population is willing to be economically dispossessed rather than to leave the EU. Thus Greeks have forfeited their sovereignty and independence. A country without its own money is not, and cannot be, an independent country.

Once European intellectuals signed off on the EU, they committed nations to vassalage, both to the EU bureaucrats and to Washington. Consequently, European nations are not independent and cannot exercise an independent foreign policy.

Their impotence means that Washington can drive them to war.
To fully understand the impotence of Europe look at France. The only leader in Europe worthy of the name is Marine Le Pen. Having said this, I am immediately denounced by the European left as a fascist, a racist, and so forth. This only shows the knee-jerk response of the European left.

It is not I who shares Le Pen’s views on immigration. It is the French people. Le Pen’s party won the recent EU elections. What Le Pen stands for is French independence from the EU. The majority of French see themselves as French and want to remain French with their own laws and customs. Only Le Pen among European politicians has stated the obvious: “The Americans are taking us to war!”

Despite the French desire for independence, the French will elect Le Pen’s party to the EU but will not give it the vote to be the government of France. The French deny themselves their independence, because they are heavily conditioned by brainwashing, much coming from the left, and are ashamed to be racists, fascists, and whatever epithets have been assigned to Le Pen’s political party, a party that stands for the independence of France.

The European left-wing, once a progressive force, even a revolutionary one, has become a reactionary force. It is the same in the US. I say this as one of CounterPunch’s popular contributors.

The inability even of intellectuals to recognize and accept reality means that restraints on neoconservatives are nowhere present except within Russia and China. The West is impotent to prevent Armageddon.
It is up to Russia and China, and as Washington has framed the dilemma, Armageddon can only be prevented by Russia and China accepting vassal status.

I don’t believe this is going to happen. Why would any self-respecting people submit to the corrupt West?

The hope is that Washington will cause its European vassals to rebel by pushing them too hard into conflict with Russia. The hope that European countries will be forced into an independent foreign policy also seems to be the basis of the Russian government’s strategy.

ORDER IT NOW

Perhaps intellectuals can help to bring this hope to fruition. If European politicians were to break from Washington’s hegemony and instead represent European interests, Washington would be deprived of cover for its war crimes. Washington’s aggressions would be constrained by an independent European foreign policy. The breakdown of the neoconservative unipower model would be apparent even to Washington, and the world would become a safer and better place.

Perhaps, in a more cruel, more calculating world one could make a positive argument for the “Neoconservative doctrine of world conquest” were it to deliver untold riches into the hands of the American People.
Had our unending forays of war and aggression in the middle east delivered trillions of surplus capital to our nations balance sheet and 25 years of free oil for 300 million Americans, one perhaps could make an argument ( a cold one) …” the Neocon” wars may be illegal and immoral, but at least they made US rich “.
It is the wrong argument, but were there an enormous economic upside for every American, one could make it !

One Can’t !

The dust has begun to settle on the Neocon experiment of Global Tyranny and the verdict is not good,… as a matter of fact it is so BAD, that any reasonably well educated American must conclude that rather than “helping” our country, in any way , it has been the most concerted and sustained ASSAULT on our “solvency”in our Nations history !

No group of individuals, or policy makers, has ,ever,so ravaged, terrorized, and looted our nations balance sheet as the” Neoconservatives” have, over the past twelve years !

No group of individuals, or policy makers, has ,ever,so ravaged, terrorized and looted our nations “bill of rights” as the “Neoconservatives” have, over the past twelve years !

No group of individuals, or policy makers, has so ravaged, besmirched and undone our Nations “good name and reputation” as the” Neoconservatives” have, over the past twelve years !

By far the most pernicious “subset” of the “Neocon “charter “of world hegemony(domination)” is their “zero accountability doctrine”, that they are, in effect, “permanently and unconditionally “above the law” !
This allows for complete” impunity” for any and all acts of “war, cruelty, aggression, torture, extortion, and terroristic behavior anywhere and at any time !

The second most pernicious subset of the “Neocon “charter” of world hegemony is the “fraud is good” doctrine.
This not only allows for complete and total impunity for Fraud ,but , in fact, encourages Fraud at every key level in policy planning and dissemination !

So contorted and pathetic are these “above the law” enablers” that even their feeble attempt at reform (such as the new ” anti torture McCain bill” which is trying to make “illegal “what is already illegal ) is, at best, disingenuous ! Implying, by the very nature of the bill ” a free pass for” torture felonies “over the past twelve years ” !

Hip , hip , Hooray !

Looking at the round up of candidates in the next election cycle, the” rescuing” of our nation from these predators of ethical and financial perdition, through any REAL accountability, seems such a distant and truly” remote” possibility ….one has to wonder where we will all be in ten years time !

"... far the most pernicious “subset” of the “Neocon “charter “of world hegemony(domination)” is their “zero accountability doctrine”, that they are, in effect, “permanently and unconditionally “above the law” Correct. The plutocracy' design for domination is based on zero accountability doctrine that is fundamentally undemocratic. And the zero accountability doctrine has been dragging the world towards a nuclear war. Nothing is more dangerous for any country as the inability of the Deciders to comprehend reality. The accountability is the only tool to insert the true picture of reality into the politicians' and oligarchs' heads.

These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Troll, or LOL with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used once per hour.

[As I've repeatedly stated, using multiple names---"sockpuppetry"---is not permissible for commenters on this website. From now on your one permitted name is "Tom_R" and you should expect that comments submitted under other names will be summarily trashed.]

It says: "[As I've repeatedly stated, using multiple names---"sockpuppetry"---is not permissible for commenters on this website. From now on your one permitted name is "Tom_R" and you should expect that comments submitted under other names will be summarily trashed.]"

This is fine, but surprising.

First of all, there is no such condition in the comments policy. Secondly, I do not know who "you" are.

Thirdly, it okay, whatever unz.com's policy is, it is fine. Just post the policy clearly so people know what the rules are, instead of criticizing them out of the blue and catching them off guard.

Fourthly, there is no need to get so upset. There are tons of websites now clamoring for visitors and commentators. One can set up a free site anytime and post all he wants. So this is no big deal.

Fifth, there is no bad intent in somebody wanting to use a different name. Nobody is trying to make money here.

Sixth, What about Anonymous'es?

[Use of "Anonymous" or "Anon" is an exception to the general rule, allowing regular commenters to occasionally slip into "deep-cover" mode for some reason. Also, the use of different names is not totally prohibited. For example, certain regular commenters may spend a few weeks using one name, then for unclear reasons switch to a different name for the next few weeks. Occasionally changing identities, for whatever reason, is not prohibited.]

[As I've repeatedly stated, using multiple names---"sockpuppetry"---is not permissible for commenters on this website. From now on your one permitted name is "Tom_R" and you should expect that comments submitted under other names will be summarily trashed.]

CONFUSION ABOUT COMMENT POLICY.

It says: “[As I've repeatedly stated, using multiple names---"sockpuppetry"---is not permissible for commenters on this website. From now on your one permitted name is "Tom_R" and you should expect that comments submitted under other names will be summarily trashed.]”

This is fine, but surprising.

First of all, there is no such condition in the comments policy. Secondly, I do not know who “you” are.

Thirdly, it okay, whatever unz.com’s policy is, it is fine. Just post the policy clearly so people know what the rules are, instead of criticizing them out of the blue and catching them off guard.

Fourthly, there is no need to get so upset. There are tons of websites now clamoring for visitors and commentators. One can set up a free site anytime and post all he wants. So this is no big deal.

Fifth, there is no bad intent in somebody wanting to use a different name. Nobody is trying to make money here.

Sixth, What about Anonymous’es?

[Use of "Anonymous" or "Anon" is an exception to the general rule, allowing regular commenters to occasionally slip into "deep-cover" mode for some reason. Also, the use of different names is not totally prohibited. For example, certain regular commenters may spend a few weeks using one name, then for unclear reasons switch to a different name for the next few weeks. Occasionally changing identities, for whatever reason, is not prohibited.]

Obama has been seeking a Third World War with Europe as the theatre of combat. He is the most dangerous western leader to emerge in the post Cold War era. I laugh dryly when I think back on how many young Europeans in the 1980s feared Ronald Reagan!!!

I have a close friend who was born in Australia to Ukrainian Catholic refugee parents. He himself is close enough to the Ukraine to have lectured from time to time at universities there and I don’t remember his voicing any suspicion of the Maidan revolt having been got up by the CIA. If it were one of my priorities to know whether the Ukraine is one of the latest venues for American foreign affairs folly I would ask his opinion as he is honest objective and Australian rather than Ukrainian and professionally depends on getting things right rather than getting published or being quoted. However I have one small contribution to make for those who want to remain sceptical. On Wednesday 17th June my old lefty friend, autodidact, film producer, self-made advertising entrepreneur, and interviewer on the Australian Broadcasting Commission’s Radio National’s “Late Night Live” for 25 years (with big worldwide audience), Phillip Adams, had on one Oliver Bullough who had written for Granta (Issue 132 I think) about the Ukrainian problems and I was surprised to hear nothing about the CIA or US culpability but a case that the Ukrainians simply, again, tried to get rid of the corrupt oligarchs who had been bleeding the country ever since the mistakes of the early 90s designed to deSovietize in a hurry. Perhaps the real US naiveté in all the Ukrainian policy and commentary is caused by America’s fetish about the word “democratic” (so detached from useful analysis of reality). The “democratically elected” Russian-allied president who left in a hurry was, as we have probably already learned, obscenely corrupt. One of the more amusing details about the treasures found unpacked (amidst the most appalling kitsch) at his palace was a gift of some artwork from the Ukrainian Tax Office…..

You wrote:"He himself is close enough to the Ukraine to have lectured from time to time at universities there ... ".

What was the source of money to make such trips?What kind of work in Australia allows to leave your job "from time to time" for lecturing in the country, which is geographically so distant from Australia?What is the profession of your friend, for which Ukrainians do not have experts in their own land?

Mr. Roberts writes"the elected democratic government of Victor Yanukovych."More proper would be to wrtie the democratically elected government'

Perhaps the US/Russia conflict in Ukraine is a case when you need to believe your lying eyes and your lying ears. 1. "Fuck the EU!" (original File) - Victoria Nuland phoning with Geoffrey Pyatthttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KIvRljAaNgg2. "Regime Change in Kiev, Victoria Nuland Admits: US Has Invested $5 Billion In The Development of Ukrainian, "Democratic Institutions:" http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article37599.htm3. A cherry on a pie (in memory of the US sacrifices during the WWII): "U.S. House Admits Nazi Role in Ukraine:" https://consortiumnews.com/2015/06/12/u-s-house-admits-nazi-role-in-ukraine/4. "Stratfor’s George Friedman Fingers US Complicity For Ukraine Coup D’etat:" http://thenewsdoctors.com/stratfors-george-friedman-fingers-us-responsibility-for-ukraine-coup-detat/

Well, if the Ukrainians were just trying to get rid of the oligarchs at Maidan they sure goofed rather badly, for all of their new leaders are genuine oligarchs of the worst possible kind. And why didn't they dump the disgusting Kolomoisky while they were busy in the Maidan? As oligarchs go he is a genuine monster. But he still reigns supreme in that unhappy land.

No, they've got real, bad oligarchs over them now and that's because like so many people they were played for suckers by International Finance. And isn't it charming that Ukraine is now being flooded with pornography and homosexual propaganda both of which it had valiantly resisted prior to the coup.

I'm beginning to think we're going to have to stop telling "dumb Polish" jokes and replace them with "dumb Ukrainian" jokes.

I have a close friend who was born in Australia to Ukrainian Catholic refugee parents. He himself is close enough to the Ukraine to have lectured from time to time at universities there and I don't remember his voicing any suspicion of the Maidan revolt having been got up by the CIA. If it were one of my priorities to know whether the Ukraine is one of the latest venues for American foreign affairs folly I would ask his opinion as he is honest objective and Australian rather than Ukrainian and professionally depends on getting things right rather than getting published or being quoted. However I have one small contribution to make for those who want to remain sceptical. On Wednesday 17th June my old lefty friend, autodidact, film producer, self-made advertising entrepreneur, and interviewer on the Australian Broadcasting Commission's Radio National's "Late Night Live" for 25 years (with big worldwide audience), Phillip Adams, had on one Oliver Bullough who had written for Granta (Issue 132 I think) about the Ukrainian problems and I was surprised to hear nothing about the CIA or US culpability but a case that the Ukrainians simply, again, tried to get rid of the corrupt oligarchs who had been bleeding the country ever since the mistakes of the early 90s designed to deSovietize in a hurry. Perhaps the real US naiveté in all the Ukrainian policy and commentary is caused by America's fetish about the word "democratic" (so detached from useful analysis of reality). The "democratically elected" Russian-allied president who left in a hurry was, as we have probably already learned, obscenely corrupt. One of the more amusing details about the treasures found unpacked (amidst the most appalling kitsch) at his palace was a gift of some artwork from the Ukrainian Tax Office.....

You’ll have no trouble finding the Late Night Live interview via Google using obvious keywords

Perhaps, in a more cruel, more calculating world one could make a positive argument for the "Neoconservative doctrine of world conquest" were it to deliver untold riches into the hands of the American People.
Had our unending forays of war and aggression in the middle east delivered trillions of surplus capital to our nations balance sheet and 25 years of free oil for 300 million Americans, one perhaps could make an argument ( a cold one) ..." the Neocon" wars may be illegal and immoral, but at least they made US rich ".
It is the wrong argument, but were there an enormous economic upside for every American, one could make it !

One Can't !

The dust has begun to settle on the Neocon experiment of Global Tyranny and the verdict is not good,... as a matter of fact it is so BAD, that any reasonably well educated American must conclude that rather than "helping" our country, in any way , it has been the most concerted and sustained ASSAULT on our "solvency"in our Nations history !

No group of individuals, or policy makers, has ,ever,so ravaged, terrorized, and looted our nations balance sheet as the" Neoconservatives" have, over the past twelve years !

No group of individuals, or policy makers, has ,ever,so ravaged, terrorized and looted our nations "bill of rights" as the "Neoconservatives" have, over the past twelve years !

No group of individuals, or policy makers, has so ravaged, besmirched and undone our Nations "good name and reputation" as the" Neoconservatives" have, over the past twelve years !

By far the most pernicious "subset" of the "Neocon "charter "of world hegemony(domination)" is their "zero accountability doctrine", that they are, in effect, "permanently and unconditionally "above the law" !
This allows for complete" impunity" for any and all acts of "war, cruelty, aggression, torture, extortion, and terroristic behavior anywhere and at any time !

The second most pernicious subset of the "Neocon "charter" of world hegemony is the "fraud is good" doctrine.
This not only allows for complete and total impunity for Fraud ,but , in fact, encourages Fraud at every key level in policy planning and dissemination !

So contorted and pathetic are these "above the law" enablers" that even their feeble attempt at reform (such as the new " anti torture McCain bill" which is trying to make "illegal "what is already illegal ) is, at best, disingenuous ! Implying, by the very nature of the bill " a free pass for" torture felonies "over the past twelve years " !

Hip , hip , Hooray !

Looking at the round up of candidates in the next election cycle, the" rescuing" of our nation from these predators of ethical and financial perdition, through any REAL accountability, seems such a distant and truly" remote" possibility ....one has to wonder where we will all be in ten years time !

“… far the most pernicious “subset” of the “Neocon “charter “of world hegemony(domination)” is their “zero accountability doctrine”, that they are, in effect, “permanently and unconditionally “above the law”
Correct. The plutocracy’ design for domination is based on zero accountability doctrine that is fundamentally undemocratic. And the zero accountability doctrine has been dragging the world towards a nuclear war. Nothing is more dangerous for any country as the inability of the Deciders to comprehend reality. The accountability is the only tool to insert the true picture of reality into the politicians’ and oligarchs’ heads.

Why do want to flood US Domestic Labor Markets with dark skinned scab labor thereby by depriving The Historic Native Born White American Working Class of the very great benefit of a severe labor scarcity?…You know what that means:Native Born White American Teenagers from the American Heartland vulnerable to the lies of Military Recruiters…then off to Iraq…then off to Walter Reed Army Hospital as a basket case attached to a bed pan full of maggots.

I don’t wont the dark skinned scab labor in the US…for they are the highly racialized high fertility imported Democratic Party Voting Bloc that installed the homosexual Kenyan Dear Leader WAR CRIMINAL…TWICE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

The Democratic Party has annihilated several thousand Conservative Orthodox Christian Russian Speaking Ukranians in the Ukraine.

I have a close friend who was born in Australia to Ukrainian Catholic refugee parents. He himself is close enough to the Ukraine to have lectured from time to time at universities there and I don't remember his voicing any suspicion of the Maidan revolt having been got up by the CIA. If it were one of my priorities to know whether the Ukraine is one of the latest venues for American foreign affairs folly I would ask his opinion as he is honest objective and Australian rather than Ukrainian and professionally depends on getting things right rather than getting published or being quoted. However I have one small contribution to make for those who want to remain sceptical. On Wednesday 17th June my old lefty friend, autodidact, film producer, self-made advertising entrepreneur, and interviewer on the Australian Broadcasting Commission's Radio National's "Late Night Live" for 25 years (with big worldwide audience), Phillip Adams, had on one Oliver Bullough who had written for Granta (Issue 132 I think) about the Ukrainian problems and I was surprised to hear nothing about the CIA or US culpability but a case that the Ukrainians simply, again, tried to get rid of the corrupt oligarchs who had been bleeding the country ever since the mistakes of the early 90s designed to deSovietize in a hurry. Perhaps the real US naiveté in all the Ukrainian policy and commentary is caused by America's fetish about the word "democratic" (so detached from useful analysis of reality). The "democratically elected" Russian-allied president who left in a hurry was, as we have probably already learned, obscenely corrupt. One of the more amusing details about the treasures found unpacked (amidst the most appalling kitsch) at his palace was a gift of some artwork from the Ukrainian Tax Office.....

You wrote:
“He himself is close enough to the Ukraine to have lectured from time to time at universities there … “.

What was the source of money to make such trips?
What kind of work in Australia allows to leave your job “from time to time” for lecturing in the country, which is geographically so distant from Australia?
What is the profession of your friend, for which Ukrainians do not have experts in their own land?

Mr. Roberts writes
“the elected democratic government of Victor Yanukovych.”
More proper would be to wrtie
the democratically elected government’

” ..we give the politicians bags full of money. They belong to us. They answer to us.”

I don’t accept this as a sufficient explanation for the near-universal compliance we are seeing among politicians and journalists. I have said before that there has to be a deeper, even more venal tactic in play: namely blackmail. Professional politicians, that new class of being, are bred to amorality – often and often they inadvertently allow us glimpses of their personal lives which reveal just how vulnerable this sort of supreme egotist can become. At university they are reared on Machiavelli – their professors dote on him and they emerge, covert Machiavellians, lacking any moral fervour, but simply aching to grasp the levers of power.

Having added this, let me say that I have long admired PCR’s insight and personal courage – here, as in 90% of his stands, he is right on target.

I hope you haven’t misconstrued the point of my post. If you haven’t you will have listened to the Late Night Live interview, and if you do, or if you read the Granta article, I would be glad to read an informed response.

My friend was a full professor of Accounting and Finance in his 30s at a respectable university in Australia but has been a management consultant with top tier banks and global accounting firms specialising I think in infrastructure projects and finance. It could well have been work for the Ukrainian government, an investor or a NGO which took him to the Ukraine and gave a university the chance to get a fare-paid lecturer….

It appears that I always have to give you a view contrary to your established views.

You appear to be new here so you have not seen one of my previous analysis which aimed to put Australia as the third most brainwashed country in the World, sharing this place with Canada. The most brainwashed nation on the planet is US, the second is Japan, the third is Australia+Canada.

My Brainwashed Index, was based on three factors:1) how concentrated the media in the country are into MSM,2) how susceptible the population is to brainwashing (cultural factors), and3) how keen is the country's regime to employ, that is, how much money is the potential gain if masses do or believe what they are told (e.g. military-industrial complex, vested interests etc).

Thus, for example, Japan's regime is not too keen to brainwash, but the media are concentrated and the population is extremely susceptible, thus second place. On the opposite side are most European countries which are highly skeptical of propaganda of vested interests and government, plus most have diversified media.

Thus, quoting a Late Night Live interview on ABC Radio National as something reliable is simply laughable. In Australia, the media are highly concentrated, the regime is keen on the US line of propaganda and the population is highly susceptible (gullible).

I have a close friend who was born in Australia to Ukrainian Catholic refugee parents. He himself is close enough to the Ukraine to have lectured from time to time at universities there and I don't remember his voicing any suspicion of the Maidan revolt having been got up by the CIA. If it were one of my priorities to know whether the Ukraine is one of the latest venues for American foreign affairs folly I would ask his opinion as he is honest objective and Australian rather than Ukrainian and professionally depends on getting things right rather than getting published or being quoted. However I have one small contribution to make for those who want to remain sceptical. On Wednesday 17th June my old lefty friend, autodidact, film producer, self-made advertising entrepreneur, and interviewer on the Australian Broadcasting Commission's Radio National's "Late Night Live" for 25 years (with big worldwide audience), Phillip Adams, had on one Oliver Bullough who had written for Granta (Issue 132 I think) about the Ukrainian problems and I was surprised to hear nothing about the CIA or US culpability but a case that the Ukrainians simply, again, tried to get rid of the corrupt oligarchs who had been bleeding the country ever since the mistakes of the early 90s designed to deSovietize in a hurry. Perhaps the real US naiveté in all the Ukrainian policy and commentary is caused by America's fetish about the word "democratic" (so detached from useful analysis of reality). The "democratically elected" Russian-allied president who left in a hurry was, as we have probably already learned, obscenely corrupt. One of the more amusing details about the treasures found unpacked (amidst the most appalling kitsch) at his palace was a gift of some artwork from the Ukrainian Tax Office.....

"A cherry on a pie (in memory of the US sacrifices during the WWII): “U.S. House Admits Nazi Role in Ukraine"

Bait taken by annamarina.

Knowing that the '6M and gas chambers' are well established frauds devoid of necessary physical evidence, and that they were manufactured by the early version "Neocons", aka: supremacist Zionist Jews & their paid-for goys, render the entire 'Nazis in Ukraine' silly & irrelevant.

The 'holocaust' storyline is one of the most easily debunked narratives ever contrived. That is why those who question it are arrested and persecuted. That is why violent, racist, & privileged Jewish supremacists demand censorship. What sort of truth is it that crushes the freedom to seek the truth? Truth needs no protection from scrutiny.

Some bug prevented an earlier reply to your post with its interesting links. I shall try to be as thorough as I was in my first effort.

The case you are trying to make and the evidence you are adducing reminds me of the problem found in many areas of disputation wherein the weakness of what is supposed to be conclusive actually undermines a case which is not necessarily wholly wrong.

For example, the fact that a State Department person is caught saying "Fuck the EU" proves nothing to my mind except that on one of the hourly occasions on which a US government person expressed strong disdain for, or irritation with, the EU one of them was unprofessionally careless and got herself recorded. It really is tabloid stuff to shout Gotcha over Gordon Brown during an election campaign calling a Labor supporting woman a bigot and being recorded, or the French diplomat calling Israel "a shitty little country".

And what's new about nasty people, like neo-Nazis (whom I will assume to be nasty even if they are really anti-Kaganovich children of the Holodomor with a background we know very little about) being on the US side? Was it every otherwise in Latin America? Gee, we had Stalin and his NKVD on side in WW2.

As for Strafor's George Friedman the key word seems to be "coup". I naturally did a search to see if Stratfor or George Friedman had any relevant denial, confirmation or other comment to make. Nothing I could find though maybe there was something after the dozen pro-Russian websites that repeated what Friedman is supposed to have said. But, again, so what? Let's look at two problems.

One is that the word coup which is used in the game of bridge and other games and also used to describe, for example, a successful takeover, has not necessary implication of illegality or violence.

A second is that when you take the trouble to read Stratfor's published pieces on Ukraine you will find a measured view based on how the interests of the US and Russia are perceived to clash. It is perfectly capable of supporting my interim view that the US didn't know nearly enough about Russian or the Ukraine to pull off a coup which would not provoke a very strong reaction from Russia which one can readily accept would be worried about the Ukraine not only aligning its economy with the EU but potentially joining NATO and even having US troops based there. It could well be enough for Putin to put two and two together and add them to 5 when he saw how much money was being poured into NGOs with, as some have pointed out, apparently little attempt to downgrade the excessive power of corrupt oligarchs (or even honest oligarch billionaires). My criticism of the US is that it has overstretched itself for a long time and has neither the economic or military strength or the information or properly deployed brains to make over the world without much damage. China certainly should have been enlisted early for the policing of the world. Russia is a declining power and could surely have been handled with some tact and patience, albeit cynically, so the obvious solution in the Ukraine would seem agreeable; i.e. free trade with the EU and much devolution of regional and municipal government but non-alignment reaffirmed. Yes, probably more US fault than Russia's in the formation and execution of policy even if - surely - we would be happier with the Ukraine turning into a Poland, or even Bulgaria, than a Belarus.

9/11 was completely avoidable….here’s how:1)no passage of the 1965 Immigration Reform Act….2)A National Origins Immigration Policy that completely excluded all Muslims…3)Mass deportation of all Muslims…

If 1-3 had been implemented back in 1965…9/11 would never have occured…No Muslims in Our America….No 9/11.

So why the F are Muslims being allowed into our America?..Answer:So that Muslims can vote Whitey into a violently persecuted racial minority on Nov 3 2016…

"9/11 was completely avoidable….here’s how:1)no passage of the 1965 Immigration Reform Act….2)A National Origins Immigration Policy that completely excluded all Muslims…3)Mass deportation of all Muslims…"

Apparently you missed it. There is no proof that Muslims did 9/11.

Nothing changes until the utter impossibility on our evil government's absurd conspiracy theory about 9/11 is understood and the real culprits executed.

Why hasn’t Steve Sailer made a post about George Yancy’s interview with Noam Chomsky in the Sunday NYT two months ago?

Paul

All those high fertility,highly racialized dark-skinned Democratic Party Voters you want to allow in….California’s most famous endemic and endangered species…the Red Legged Frog…will have its last known and remaining habitat paved over for housing for the highly racialized Han People…You know about the Red Legged Frog Paul?…The Red Legged Frog was featured in Mark Twain’s iconic Native Born White Americana famous short story:”THE LEAPING FROG OF CALAVARAS COUNTY”….This short story by Twain is the profound intersection of Native Born White American Cultural Americana and California’s Biodiversity and Natural Beauty…The passage of the 1965 Immigration Reform Act will result in the violent extermination of this profound Racial Blood-Soil intersection-blending of Native Born White Americana and Native Born White America’s Wildlife and Biodiversity.

Note how the major war moves the US has made throughout it’s history have been preceded by ‘incidents’ that always come just at the right moment: the Maine, the Lusitania, Pearl Harbor, Gulf of Tonkin, 9-11. The last one, 9-11, was a modern day version of the Reichstag fire enabling the government to immediately curtail the rights of citizens, enlarge the domestic security machine and launch wars without restraint. The Homeland Security act seems to have been already written and was on file waiting to be pulled out. The entire US treasury could now be looted in the name of ‘security’ and ‘fighting terrorism’. 9-11 can be seen as a coup in American history where a small number of people shifted power to themselves and make policy with no democratic checks upon them. The public is simply lied to and manipulated. A democracy can’t be any stronger than the cultural level of the public which is seemingly deliberately kept down by the steady stream of pablum fed to it and that’s the way they want it.

The Homeland Security act seems to have been already written and was on file waiting to be pulled out.

The Homeland Security Act was introduced by Joe Lieberman on Oct 11 2001. It was co-sponsored by Arlen Specter. https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/107/s1534

Interesting that both Lieberman and Specter switched parties to retain their senate seats.

One of Specter's last acts as a US senator was to provide protection from prosecution to Zalman Shapiro, who was head of NUMEC when uranium went missing from the plant in Apollo, PA, and, it is alleged, found its way to Israel. http://www.amazon.com/Divert-Shapiro-Diversion-Weapons-Uranium/dp/0982775709

I have a close friend who was born in Australia to Ukrainian Catholic refugee parents. He himself is close enough to the Ukraine to have lectured from time to time at universities there and I don't remember his voicing any suspicion of the Maidan revolt having been got up by the CIA. If it were one of my priorities to know whether the Ukraine is one of the latest venues for American foreign affairs folly I would ask his opinion as he is honest objective and Australian rather than Ukrainian and professionally depends on getting things right rather than getting published or being quoted. However I have one small contribution to make for those who want to remain sceptical. On Wednesday 17th June my old lefty friend, autodidact, film producer, self-made advertising entrepreneur, and interviewer on the Australian Broadcasting Commission's Radio National's "Late Night Live" for 25 years (with big worldwide audience), Phillip Adams, had on one Oliver Bullough who had written for Granta (Issue 132 I think) about the Ukrainian problems and I was surprised to hear nothing about the CIA or US culpability but a case that the Ukrainians simply, again, tried to get rid of the corrupt oligarchs who had been bleeding the country ever since the mistakes of the early 90s designed to deSovietize in a hurry. Perhaps the real US naiveté in all the Ukrainian policy and commentary is caused by America's fetish about the word "democratic" (so detached from useful analysis of reality). The "democratically elected" Russian-allied president who left in a hurry was, as we have probably already learned, obscenely corrupt. One of the more amusing details about the treasures found unpacked (amidst the most appalling kitsch) at his palace was a gift of some artwork from the Ukrainian Tax Office.....

Well, if the Ukrainians were just trying to get rid of the oligarchs at Maidan they sure goofed rather badly, for all of their new leaders are genuine oligarchs of the worst possible kind. And why didn’t they dump the disgusting Kolomoisky while they were busy in the Maidan? As oligarchs go he is a genuine monster. But he still reigns supreme in that unhappy land.

No, they’ve got real, bad oligarchs over them now and that’s because like so many people they were played for suckers by International Finance. And isn’t it charming that Ukraine is now being flooded with pornography and homosexual propaganda both of which it had valiantly resisted prior to the coup.

I’m beginning to think we’re going to have to stop telling “dumb Polish” jokes and replace them with “dumb Ukrainian” jokes.

As soon as I read these words in Wizard of Oz’s comment,“My friend was a full professor of Accounting and Finance in his 30s at a respectable university in Australia but has been a management consultant with top tier banks and global accounting firms specialising I think in infrastructure projects and finance. It could well have been work for the Ukrainian government, an investor or a NGO which took him to the Ukraine and gave a university the chance to get a fare-paid lecturer….”,

a popular joke came to mind.

--- I suspect something about my wife, but don’t have convincing evidence.--- And what is the matter?--- The other day she met a man, whom I do not know. They went to a restaurant nearby, and I waited them across the street. Then they entered a housing building, and I followed them. They entered an apartment, and I started to watch through the keyhole. They took off all their clothes. And here again came the damn uncertainty: they turned off the lights. In Russian: (: Они потушили свет: опять проклятая неизвестность!!! )

As soon as I read,” management consultant with top tier banks and global accounting firms”, “an investor or a NGO which took him to the Ukraine”, damn uncertainty descended upon me.

Well, if the Ukrainians were just trying to get rid of the oligarchs at Maidan they sure goofed rather badly, for all of their new leaders are genuine oligarchs of the worst possible kind. And why didn't they dump the disgusting Kolomoisky while they were busy in the Maidan? As oligarchs go he is a genuine monster. But he still reigns supreme in that unhappy land.

No, they've got real, bad oligarchs over them now and that's because like so many people they were played for suckers by International Finance. And isn't it charming that Ukraine is now being flooded with pornography and homosexual propaganda both of which it had valiantly resisted prior to the coup.

I'm beginning to think we're going to have to stop telling "dumb Polish" jokes and replace them with "dumb Ukrainian" jokes.

Did you hear about the Ukrainian that was stuck on the escalator for eight hours after the power went out?

9/11 was completely avoidable....here's how:1)no passage of the 1965 Immigration Reform Act....2)A National Origins Immigration Policy that completely excluded all Muslims...3)Mass deportation of all Muslims...

If 1-3 had been implemented back in 1965...9/11 would never have occured...No Muslims in Our America....No 9/11.

So why the F are Muslims being allowed into our America?..Answer:So that Muslims can vote Whitey into a violently persecuted racial minority on Nov 3 2016...

“9/11 was completely avoidable….here’s how:1)no passage of the 1965 Immigration Reform Act….2)A National Origins Immigration Policy that completely excluded all Muslims…3)Mass deportation of all Muslims…”

Apparently you missed it. There is no proof that Muslims did 9/11.

Nothing changes until the utter impossibility on our evil government’s absurd conspiracy theory about 9/11 is understood and the real culprits executed.

The Muslim immigrants did it...and it wasn't all that hard to pull off. The Muslim immigrants just took advantage of a Nation of jock sniffing imbecile White Americans. It was like taking candy from a retarded child.

I trust the MIT Engineering Department over the very fraudulent and substandard Architects and Engineers for Truth.

PCR is either a crazy m....ther....f.......r or a liar...Take your pick.

Perhaps the US/Russia conflict in Ukraine is a case when you need to believe your lying eyes and your lying ears. 1. "Fuck the EU!" (original File) - Victoria Nuland phoning with Geoffrey Pyatthttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KIvRljAaNgg2. "Regime Change in Kiev, Victoria Nuland Admits: US Has Invested $5 Billion In The Development of Ukrainian, "Democratic Institutions:" http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article37599.htm3. A cherry on a pie (in memory of the US sacrifices during the WWII): "U.S. House Admits Nazi Role in Ukraine:" https://consortiumnews.com/2015/06/12/u-s-house-admits-nazi-role-in-ukraine/4. "Stratfor’s George Friedman Fingers US Complicity For Ukraine Coup D’etat:" http://thenewsdoctors.com/stratfors-george-friedman-fingers-us-responsibility-for-ukraine-coup-detat/

“A cherry on a pie (in memory of the US sacrifices during the WWII): “U.S. House Admits Nazi Role in Ukraine”

Bait taken by annamarina.

Knowing that the ’6M and gas chambers’ are well established frauds devoid of necessary physical evidence, and that they were manufactured by the early version “Neocons”, aka: supremacist Zionist Jews & their paid-for goys, render the entire ‘Nazis in Ukraine’ silly & irrelevant.

The ‘holocaust’ storyline is one of the most easily debunked narratives ever contrived. That is why those who question it are arrested and persecuted. That is why violent, racist, & privileged Jewish supremacists demand censorship. What sort of truth is it that crushes the freedom to seek the truth? Truth needs no protection from scrutiny.

Knowing that the ’6M and gas chambers’ are well established frauds devoid of necessary physical evidence, and that they were manufactured by the early version “Neocons”, aka: supremacist Zionist Jews & their paid-for goys, render the entire ‘Nazis in Ukraine’ silly & irrelevant.

You keep saying this, I keep challenging you, you keep ducking my questions, and then a day later, you show up and say the same things. What's up with you? Are you at all interested in debating here, or are you just here to shill for your little forum?

Well, if the Ukrainians were just trying to get rid of the oligarchs at Maidan they sure goofed rather badly, for all of their new leaders are genuine oligarchs of the worst possible kind. And why didn't they dump the disgusting Kolomoisky while they were busy in the Maidan? As oligarchs go he is a genuine monster. But he still reigns supreme in that unhappy land.

No, they've got real, bad oligarchs over them now and that's because like so many people they were played for suckers by International Finance. And isn't it charming that Ukraine is now being flooded with pornography and homosexual propaganda both of which it had valiantly resisted prior to the coup.

I'm beginning to think we're going to have to stop telling "dumb Polish" jokes and replace them with "dumb Ukrainian" jokes.

Re Wizard of Oz:

As soon as I read these words in Wizard of Oz’s comment,
“My friend was a full professor of Accounting and Finance in his 30s at a respectable university in Australia but has been a management consultant with top tier banks and global accounting firms specialising I think in infrastructure projects and finance. It could well have been work for the Ukrainian government, an investor or a NGO which took him to the Ukraine and gave a university the chance to get a fare-paid lecturer….”,

a popular joke came to mind.

— I suspect something about my wife, but don’t have convincing evidence.
— And what is the matter?
— The other day she met a man, whom I do not know. They went to a restaurant nearby, and I waited them across the street. Then they entered a housing building, and I followed them. They entered an apartment, and I started to watch through the keyhole. They took off all their clothes.And here again came the damn uncertainty: they turned off the lights.
In Russian: (: Они потушили свет: опять проклятая неизвестность!!! )

As soon as I read,” management consultant with top tier banks and global accounting firms”, “an investor or a NGO which took him to the Ukraine”,
damn uncertainty descended upon me.

The Wizard of Oz's friend sounds like he belongs to the Australian branch of Ukrainian Catholic DPs who came to Canada at the same time and for the same reasons. Here's a Ukrainian Insurgent Army monument in Oakville, Ontario, Canada:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ukrainian_Insurgent_Army#/media/File:UPA_Monument_2.jpg

My guess is the Wizard's friend has that same provenance. They're great folks but are "one-eyed" when it comes to things Russian. I'm fine with them being anti-Soviet but they need to keep up with events. If they're willing to turn Ukraine into a European Iraq, Libya, Afghanistan or Syria then just keep on taking the US/EU mystery money.

I guess on the positive side, if they keep on pushing for war with Russia, the Ukrainian communities in Canada and Australia will get a whole new wave of members. Some of them may glow in the dark by then but nothing's perfect.

Your uncertainty is completely appropriate because anything to do with my very decent and balanced friend is really irrelevant except that I was showing what kind of relaxed sceptic I am on matters to do with the Ukraine; I.e. I couldn't even be bothered to try some of this blogs ideas on him.

But I am a little intrigued though by your interest in the subject. My friends interests are very much centred on Australia.

"A cherry on a pie (in memory of the US sacrifices during the WWII): “U.S. House Admits Nazi Role in Ukraine"

Bait taken by annamarina.

Knowing that the '6M and gas chambers' are well established frauds devoid of necessary physical evidence, and that they were manufactured by the early version "Neocons", aka: supremacist Zionist Jews & their paid-for goys, render the entire 'Nazis in Ukraine' silly & irrelevant.

The 'holocaust' storyline is one of the most easily debunked narratives ever contrived. That is why those who question it are arrested and persecuted. That is why violent, racist, & privileged Jewish supremacists demand censorship. What sort of truth is it that crushes the freedom to seek the truth? Truth needs no protection from scrutiny.

The tide is turning.

Knowing that the ’6M and gas chambers’ are well established frauds devoid of necessary physical evidence, and that they were manufactured by the early version “Neocons”, aka: supremacist Zionist Jews & their paid-for goys, render the entire ‘Nazis in Ukraine’ silly & irrelevant.

You keep saying this, I keep challenging you, you keep ducking my questions, and then a day later, you show up and say the same things. What’s up with you? Are you at all interested in debating here, or are you just here to shill for your little forum?

As soon as I read these words in Wizard of Oz’s comment,“My friend was a full professor of Accounting and Finance in his 30s at a respectable university in Australia but has been a management consultant with top tier banks and global accounting firms specialising I think in infrastructure projects and finance. It could well have been work for the Ukrainian government, an investor or a NGO which took him to the Ukraine and gave a university the chance to get a fare-paid lecturer….”,

a popular joke came to mind.

--- I suspect something about my wife, but don’t have convincing evidence.--- And what is the matter?--- The other day she met a man, whom I do not know. They went to a restaurant nearby, and I waited them across the street. Then they entered a housing building, and I followed them. They entered an apartment, and I started to watch through the keyhole. They took off all their clothes. And here again came the damn uncertainty: they turned off the lights. In Russian: (: Они потушили свет: опять проклятая неизвестность!!! )

As soon as I read,” management consultant with top tier banks and global accounting firms”, “an investor or a NGO which took him to the Ukraine”, damn uncertainty descended upon me.

This made me laugh. Good one.

The Wizard of Oz’s friend sounds like he belongs to the Australian branch of Ukrainian Catholic DPs who came to Canada at the same time and for the same reasons. Here’s a Ukrainian Insurgent Army monument in Oakville, Ontario, Canada:
My guess is the Wizard’s friend has that same provenance. They’re great folks but are “one-eyed” when it comes to things Russian. I’m fine with them being anti-Soviet but they need to keep up with events. If they’re willing to turn Ukraine into a European Iraq, Libya, Afghanistan or Syria then just keep on taking the US/EU mystery money.

I guess on the positive side, if they keep on pushing for war with Russia, the Ukrainian communities in Canada and Australia will get a whole new wave of members. Some of them may glow in the dark by then but nothing’s perfect.

@Cagey Beast
Interesting but fwiw you would be wrong about my friend (it's hard to believe a former professor of accounting and finance has such a sunny disposition). He's so integrated into Australian life and ways that he has even written a book on an Australian WW1 war hero and a close friend of both of us just assumed for decades that he was Orthodox until (because I happened to have asked) I was able to put him right.

Paul Wolfowitz, a leading neoconservative, penned the Wolfowitz Doctrine shortly after the Soviet collapse. This doctrine is the basis of US foreign and military policy.

Wolfowitz is Jew and part of the Project for a New American Century. It is miss named, it really is the Project for a Jewish Century. Wolfowitz and his cabal’s intention is to make the world safe for nuclear apartheid Israel and enable Jewry to straddle America’s culture, democracy, and economy.

By deceit, they have stolen the patrimony of the 300,000,000 American people. This is an immense crime.

"9/11 was completely avoidable….here’s how:1)no passage of the 1965 Immigration Reform Act….2)A National Origins Immigration Policy that completely excluded all Muslims…3)Mass deportation of all Muslims…"

Apparently you missed it. There is no proof that Muslims did 9/11.

Nothing changes until the utter impossibility on our evil government's absurd conspiracy theory about 9/11 is understood and the real culprits executed.

Don't die stupid.

http://www.ae911truth.org/

The Muslim immigrants did it…and it wasn’t all that hard to pull off. The Muslim immigrants just took advantage of a Nation of jock sniffing imbecile White Americans. It was like taking candy from a retarded child.

I trust the MIT Engineering Department over the very fraudulent and substandard Architects and Engineers for Truth.

There is an " MIT School of Engineering ", consisting of about 9 different Departments, e.g. Dept. of Mechanical Engineering, etc. , seehttp://engineering.mit.edu/academics-research None of them has the name "Department of Engineering".

So you're saying you trust the Indian immigrant Shyam Sunder, head of NIST's official investigation into 9/11, over Native Born White Americans like Paul Craig Roberts and other Native Born White American Architects and Engineers for Truth?

9/11 was completely avoidable....here's how:1)no passage of the 1965 Immigration Reform Act....2)A National Origins Immigration Policy that completely excluded all Muslims...3)Mass deportation of all Muslims...

If 1-3 had been implemented back in 1965...9/11 would never have occured...No Muslims in Our America....No 9/11.

So why the F are Muslims being allowed into our America?..Answer:So that Muslims can vote Whitey into a violently persecuted racial minority on Nov 3 2016...

Right…just close all the loopholes in immigration law, so only Legal Immigrant Muslims can come to America to be good “American” Muslims and contribute to America by voting Whitey into a violently persecuted racial minority on Nov 3 2016…Like General Casey said about the Fort Hood shooting:”We don’t want to use this shooting as an excuse to shut down the importation of Muslim legal immigrants who contribute much needed diversity to America”…

9/11 was a massive indictment of The passage of The 1965 Immigration Reform Act…

The Muslim immigrants did it...and it wasn't all that hard to pull off. The Muslim immigrants just took advantage of a Nation of jock sniffing imbecile White Americans. It was like taking candy from a retarded child.

I trust the MIT Engineering Department over the very fraudulent and substandard Architects and Engineers for Truth.

PCR is either a crazy m....ther....f.......r or a liar...Take your pick.

There is an ” MIT School of Engineering “, consisting of about 9 different Departments,
e.g. Dept. of Mechanical Engineering, etc. , see

Right...just close all the loopholes in immigration law, so only Legal Immigrant Muslims can come to America to be good "American" Muslims and contribute to America by voting Whitey into a violently persecuted racial minority on Nov 3 2016...Like General Casey said about the Fort Hood shooting:"We don't want to use this shooting as an excuse to shut down the importation of Muslim legal immigrants who contribute much needed diversity to America"...

9/11 was a massive indictment of The passage of The 1965 Immigration Reform Act...

The Muslim immigrants did it...and it wasn't all that hard to pull off. The Muslim immigrants just took advantage of a Nation of jock sniffing imbecile White Americans. It was like taking candy from a retarded child.

I trust the MIT Engineering Department over the very fraudulent and substandard Architects and Engineers for Truth.

PCR is either a crazy m....ther....f.......r or a liar...Take your pick.

So you’re saying you trust the Indian immigrant Shyam Sunder, head of NIST’s official investigation into 9/11, over Native Born White Americans like Paul Craig Roberts and other Native Born White American Architects and Engineers for Truth?

No, he's saying not to trust a bunch of credulous white guys who think Dylan Avery and his clown posse are right.

I saw that so-called Engineer truther team on TV, it was clear they were suffering from acute paranoia when one experiment didn't go their way. They accused demolition contractors being in cahoots with the Conspiracy masters or whatever you call those shadowy superman you live in terror of, when one of the experiments performed didn't go as planned. They kept mumbling about "nano-thermite" which no one can produce evidence of.

What I trust is the scientific method. I think what you are trying to do is:I GOTTCHA!!!..The South Asians are indispensable...whitey can't survive without them ha ha!!!

Native Born White Americans can do just fine without the South Asians in the US. In fact we did great things when there were hardly any South Asians in the US. And, I am most definitely an enthusiast for deporting the South Asian Fifth Column.

Note how the major war moves the US has made throughout it's history have been preceded by 'incidents' that always come just at the right moment: the Maine, the Lusitania, Pearl Harbor, Gulf of Tonkin, 9-11. The last one, 9-11, was a modern day version of the Reichstag fire enabling the government to immediately curtail the rights of citizens, enlarge the domestic security machine and launch wars without restraint. The Homeland Security act seems to have been already written and was on file waiting to be pulled out. The entire US treasury could now be looted in the name of 'security' and 'fighting terrorism'. 9-11 can be seen as a coup in American history where a small number of people shifted power to themselves and make policy with no democratic checks upon them. The public is simply lied to and manipulated. A democracy can't be any stronger than the cultural level of the public which is seemingly deliberately kept down by the steady stream of pablum fed to it and that's the way they want it.

The Homeland Security act seems to have been already written and was on file waiting to be pulled out.

Right...just close all the loopholes in immigration law, so only Legal Immigrant Muslims can come to America to be good "American" Muslims and contribute to America by voting Whitey into a violently persecuted racial minority on Nov 3 2016...Like General Casey said about the Fort Hood shooting:"We don't want to use this shooting as an excuse to shut down the importation of Muslim legal immigrants who contribute much needed diversity to America"...

9/11 was a massive indictment of The passage of The 1965 Immigration Reform Act...

I plead guilty to being bigoted...racist...and racially zenophobic...I am a racial nationalist...Just like the rest of the Human Population on the Planet including places such as China and South Korea.

There is no Golden Moral Rule in Immigration Policy. No one believes in that nonsense. Native Born White Americans are not logically commited to obeying the South Asian Fifth Column's "Divine" Edict that Whitey commit demographic suicide within the borders of the US... Does America now belong to the Hindu?

{“So you’re saying you trust the Indian immigrant Shyam Sunder, head of NIST’s official investigation into 9/11, over Native Born White Americans like Paul Craig Roberts and other Native Born White American Architects and Engineers for Truth?”}

I don’t know who Shyam Sunder is.
I know who Paul Craig Roberts: he is a Great _American_.

However, placing blind faith in “Native Born White Americans” is a fool’s errand:
The Walker Family spy ring was red-white-and-blue White American: they caused immense damage to America.
The Falcon and the Snowman, former altar boy and former Catholic seminary student Christopher Boyce and Andrew Daulton Lee, two young men from wealthy California families, sold classified government information to the Soviet Union during the mid-1970s.

Not every “Native Born White Americans” is an American patriot.
Not every non- “Native Born White Americans” is not an American patriot.

“Native Born White American” Lyndon Baines Johnson, POTUS, betrayed his charges, the crew of USS Liberty, by ordering US forces rushing to her rescue to stand down.
No need to detail here what happened to USS Liberty.

“Native Born White American” Lyndon Baines Johnson: a low life traitor to America and to Americans.

So you're saying you trust the Indian immigrant Shyam Sunder, head of NIST's official investigation into 9/11, over Native Born White Americans like Paul Craig Roberts and other Native Born White American Architects and Engineers for Truth?

http://cee.mit.edu/cee-in-focus/2009/spring/shyam-sunder

No, he’s saying not to trust a bunch of credulous white guys who think Dylan Avery and his clown posse are right.

I saw that so-called Engineer truther team on TV, it was clear they were suffering from acute paranoia when one experiment didn’t go their way. They accused demolition contractors being in cahoots with the Conspiracy masters or whatever you call those shadowy superman you live in terror of, when one of the experiments performed didn’t go as planned. They kept mumbling about “nano-thermite” which no one can produce evidence of.

No, he's saying not to trust a bunch of credulous white guys who think Dylan Avery and his clown posse are right.

I saw that so-called Engineer truther team on TV, it was clear they were suffering from acute paranoia when one experiment didn't go their way. They accused demolition contractors being in cahoots with the Conspiracy masters or whatever you call those shadowy superman you live in terror of, when one of the experiments performed didn't go as planned. They kept mumbling about "nano-thermite" which no one can produce evidence of.

I hope you haven't misconstrued the point of my post. If you haven't you will have listened to the Late Night Live interview, and if you do, or if you read the Granta article, I would be glad to read an informed response.

My friend was a full professor of Accounting and Finance in his 30s at a respectable university in Australia but has been a management consultant with top tier banks and global accounting firms specialising I think in infrastructure projects and finance. It could well have been work for the Ukrainian government, an investor or a NGO which took him to the Ukraine and gave a university the chance to get a fare-paid lecturer....

It appears that I always have to give you a view contrary to your established views.

You appear to be new here so you have not seen one of my previous analysis which aimed to put Australia as the third most brainwashed country in the World, sharing this place with Canada. The most brainwashed nation on the planet is US, the second is Japan, the third is Australia+Canada.

My Brainwashed Index, was based on three factors:
1) how concentrated the media in the country are into MSM,
2) how susceptible the population is to brainwashing (cultural factors), and
3) how keen is the country’s regime to employ, that is, how much money is the potential gain if masses do or believe what they are told (e.g. military-industrial complex, vested interests etc).

Thus, for example, Japan’s regime is not too keen to brainwash, but the media are concentrated and the population is extremely susceptible, thus second place. On the opposite side are most European countries which are highly skeptical of propaganda of vested interests and government, plus most have diversified media.

Thus, quoting a Late Night Live interview on ABC Radio National as something reliable is simply laughable. In Australia, the media are highly concentrated, the regime is keen on the US line of propaganda and the population is highly susceptible (gullible).

Your analysis of anything at all is too often undermined by your failure to write as though you have read what you write about and to be conscientious in your representation of other people's views.

Can you not see the irrelevance of your self-satisfied autodidacts' views about the susceptibility to brain washing of various people. (As it happens Australians have a now-perhaps-somewhat-outdated reputation for irreverent scepticism. Any generalisations should be warily made even by those who have fully digested the impact of huge - and not unfavourable - ethnic changes while Australia's population has tripled since 1946. If you knew Australia you would know how many judges and lawyers for example regard their Canadian counterparts as piously PC. You would know that Australians are hardly even to be measured on the same scale as a nation which is more like an empire in which there are insular groups of absolutely stunning ignorance about other countries. Religion-free Australians' crime and incarceration rate is minuscule compared with that of the US with its mad fundamentalists, descendants of slaves and Latino peasants. But it seems you have confidence in your methods).

To be specific you seem to have got off on some fantasy that I was portraying something as reliable which only says something about you and your standards. I merely profferred the chance for people to listen to a Russian speaking journalist in the Ukraine and either learn something, take pause for thought, or give a reasoned and knowledge opinion about what Oliver Bullough had to say.

It doesn't help your credibility that you obviously know nothing about Late Night Live or the almost total ideological separation (albeit of the non-bloodletting kind) between the ABC which is state owned (as is SBS with its emphasis on ethnic variety and foreign language programs) and the remnants of traditional MSM. The Murdoch press sells by far the greatest numbers of daily newspapers including the leading national broadsheet but has far fewer employees than the ABC which it often criticises (the affection is mutual). The Fairfax newspapers are increasingly catering to urban lefties who probably vote Green.

Phillip Adams does indeed have some conformist views like the crusade [his word] he has conducted on AGW (aka "climate change" by the slippery) since the 1980s but he is dead against the "War on Drugs", capital punishment, mandatory sentences, locking up boat people which do not line him up with the mainstream majority voter in Australia (though capital punishment is no more likely to be restored than Australia is likely to liberalise its gun laws - rightly because the US problem is one that starts with hundreds of millions of guns in private hands and that does not apply in Australia. Sorry to go a bit off track but you obviously represent a vast web of ignorance about Australia).

So whatever point you would like to make about the oh-so-interesting working of your mind you really haven't found a good hook on which to hang your exposition.

As soon as I read these words in Wizard of Oz’s comment,“My friend was a full professor of Accounting and Finance in his 30s at a respectable university in Australia but has been a management consultant with top tier banks and global accounting firms specialising I think in infrastructure projects and finance. It could well have been work for the Ukrainian government, an investor or a NGO which took him to the Ukraine and gave a university the chance to get a fare-paid lecturer….”,

a popular joke came to mind.

--- I suspect something about my wife, but don’t have convincing evidence.--- And what is the matter?--- The other day she met a man, whom I do not know. They went to a restaurant nearby, and I waited them across the street. Then they entered a housing building, and I followed them. They entered an apartment, and I started to watch through the keyhole. They took off all their clothes. And here again came the damn uncertainty: they turned off the lights. In Russian: (: Они потушили свет: опять проклятая неизвестность!!! )

As soon as I read,” management consultant with top tier banks and global accounting firms”, “an investor or a NGO which took him to the Ukraine”, damn uncertainty descended upon me.

Your uncertainty is completely appropriate because anything to do with my very decent and balanced friend is really irrelevant except that I was showing what kind of relaxed sceptic I am on matters to do with the Ukraine; I.e. I couldn’t even be bothered to try some of this blogs ideas on him.

But I am a little intrigued though by your interest in the subject. My friends interests are very much centred on Australia.

It appears that I always have to give you a view contrary to your established views.

You appear to be new here so you have not seen one of my previous analysis which aimed to put Australia as the third most brainwashed country in the World, sharing this place with Canada. The most brainwashed nation on the planet is US, the second is Japan, the third is Australia+Canada.

My Brainwashed Index, was based on three factors:1) how concentrated the media in the country are into MSM,2) how susceptible the population is to brainwashing (cultural factors), and3) how keen is the country's regime to employ, that is, how much money is the potential gain if masses do or believe what they are told (e.g. military-industrial complex, vested interests etc).

Thus, for example, Japan's regime is not too keen to brainwash, but the media are concentrated and the population is extremely susceptible, thus second place. On the opposite side are most European countries which are highly skeptical of propaganda of vested interests and government, plus most have diversified media.

Thus, quoting a Late Night Live interview on ABC Radio National as something reliable is simply laughable. In Australia, the media are highly concentrated, the regime is keen on the US line of propaganda and the population is highly susceptible (gullible).

Your analysis of anything at all is too often undermined by your failure to write as though you have read what you write about and to be conscientious in your representation of other people’s views.

Can you not see the irrelevance of your self-satisfied autodidacts’ views about the susceptibility to brain washing of various people. (As it happens Australians have a now-perhaps-somewhat-outdated reputation for irreverent scepticism. Any generalisations should be warily made even by those who have fully digested the impact of huge – and not unfavourable – ethnic changes while Australia’s population has tripled since 1946. If you knew Australia you would know how many judges and lawyers for example regard their Canadian counterparts as piously PC. You would know that Australians are hardly even to be measured on the same scale as a nation which is more like an empire in which there are insular groups of absolutely stunning ignorance about other countries. Religion-free Australians’ crime and incarceration rate is minuscule compared with that of the US with its mad fundamentalists, descendants of slaves and Latino peasants. But it seems you have confidence in your methods).

To be specific you seem to have got off on some fantasy that I was portraying something as reliable which only says something about you and your standards. I merely profferred the chance for people to listen to a Russian speaking journalist in the Ukraine and either learn something, take pause for thought, or give a reasoned and knowledge opinion about what Oliver Bullough had to say.

It doesn’t help your credibility that you obviously know nothing about Late Night Live or the almost total ideological separation (albeit of the non-bloodletting kind) between the ABC which is state owned (as is SBS with its emphasis on ethnic variety and foreign language programs) and the remnants of traditional MSM. The Murdoch press sells by far the greatest numbers of daily newspapers including the leading national broadsheet but has far fewer employees than the ABC which it often criticises (the affection is mutual). The Fairfax newspapers are increasingly catering to urban lefties who probably vote Green.

Phillip Adams does indeed have some conformist views like the crusade [his word] he has conducted on AGW (aka “climate change” by the slippery) since the 1980s but he is dead against the “War on Drugs”, capital punishment, mandatory sentences, locking up boat people which do not line him up with the mainstream majority voter in Australia (though capital punishment is no more likely to be restored than Australia is likely to liberalise its gun laws – rightly because the US problem is one that starts with hundreds of millions of guns in private hands and that does not apply in Australia. Sorry to go a bit off track but you obviously represent a vast web of ignorance about Australia).

So whatever point you would like to make about the oh-so-interesting working of your mind you really haven’t found a good hook on which to hang your exposition.

Wiz of Oz: "It doesn’t help your credibility that you obviously know nothing about Late Night Live ..."

Fantastic.

So you firmly reject what your ears heard when Mrs. Nuland-Kagan from the US State Department had been selecting a "democratically elected" oligarch in Ukraine, and you firmly reject what your eyes saw what happened in Odessa when neo-Nazis made modern-day auto da fe to burn the pro-federalists alive (the Ukrainian neo-Nazis are cordially supported by Ukrainian diaspora that includes progeny of the former Nazi collaborators) .https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=inpRs9D4u-A

Was you close friend a recipient of the US State Dept. largesse (see $5bln. doled to Ukrainian NGO and such) or is he into finances (IMF, austerity, the "disappeared" Ukrainian gold reserve) or mineral resources acquisitions (Biden and Co, Monsanto, and other delectable names)? http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-11-18/ukraine-admits-its-gold-gone

But, I will still continue expressing my (according to you, self-serving) views not because of you then because I want something opposite to MSM to be heard. I feel a duty to reject the establishment's propaganda and to put forward an opposite point of view, this is my motivation.

Your obviously hold dearly to this view of Australia as a larrikin, Ned Kelly country, incapable of understanding that faced with the power of modern propaganda and brainwashing, the Australians are like children. I agree with you that Australia is a nation of tribes, which brings non-homogeneity in the views, but the MSM bring this back in line.

I know that you will jump at this statement of mine as well, but I have worked in the Australian media and know them fairly well. The main government medium ABC used to be a left-wing organization, until cost cutting and purges by both Liberal Party and Labor Party made it a pure government tool of propaganda. Its fate is amazingly similar to BBC's. (In general, whatever method of governance is developed in Britain, a few years later it gets transplanted into Australia.)

But the second semi-government, semi-commercial medium, SBS which you mention, is a much more interesting experiment. Started as an ethnic channel, it got transformed into a semi-cultural, semi-globalist-propaganda channel (New World Order Channel). Its former director, a Brit with Intelligence origins, steered it in the direction of the most ruthless propaganda channel in Australia. The biggest success of this channel has been a fantastic combination of anti-globalist documentaries and pro-globalist-news, an amazingly successful propagandistic schizophrenia, which attracted the top-intellectual-tier audience of the country (the intellectuals of Australia). The principal agenda of this globalist propaganda appears to be the one-world-under-Anglo-tutelage, a kind of British-Empire-Redux, which uses the US Military as its global police.

I have to stop here, but without patronizing you I wish you a more open mindset, fewer myths and prejudices, and more preparedness to engage in a real debate: to counter the opposite view without diminishing its holder.

The Wizard of Oz's friend sounds like he belongs to the Australian branch of Ukrainian Catholic DPs who came to Canada at the same time and for the same reasons. Here's a Ukrainian Insurgent Army monument in Oakville, Ontario, Canada:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ukrainian_Insurgent_Army#/media/File:UPA_Monument_2.jpg

My guess is the Wizard's friend has that same provenance. They're great folks but are "one-eyed" when it comes to things Russian. I'm fine with them being anti-Soviet but they need to keep up with events. If they're willing to turn Ukraine into a European Iraq, Libya, Afghanistan or Syria then just keep on taking the US/EU mystery money.

I guess on the positive side, if they keep on pushing for war with Russia, the Ukrainian communities in Canada and Australia will get a whole new wave of members. Some of them may glow in the dark by then but nothing's perfect.

Interesting but fwiw you would be wrong about my friend (it’s hard to believe a former professor of accounting and finance has such a sunny disposition). He’s so integrated into Australian life and ways that he has even written a book on an Australian WW1 war hero and a close friend of both of us just assumed for decades that he was Orthodox until (because I happened to have asked) I was able to put him right.

I quite like the Ukrainians and Ukrainian-Canadians with roots I've met over the years. In fact I had Christmas dinner in the home of a Ukrainian Catholic family not many miles from that UPA monument I linked to in an earlier comment. The point is that everyone has a perspective and a provenance and these have to be taken into account when you judge their version of things.

As to whether or not your friend's speaking trip to Ukraine was financed by the CIA, who knows? I very much doubt he'd know himself. There's such an elaborate web of foundations, endowments, etc that I'd bet the Director of the CIA would have trouble telling you. There's so much funny money sloshing around that I doubt anyone knows where it all comes from, let alone where it all goes. I'm sure there are swimming pools in the south of France paid for out of one or another of these funds for the promotion of democratic institutions in the former East Bloc.

So you're saying you trust the Indian immigrant Shyam Sunder, head of NIST's official investigation into 9/11, over Native Born White Americans like Paul Craig Roberts and other Native Born White American Architects and Engineers for Truth?

http://cee.mit.edu/cee-in-focus/2009/spring/shyam-sunder

What I trust is the scientific method. I think what you are trying to do is:I GOTTCHA!!!..The South Asians are indispensable…whitey can’t survive without them ha ha!!!

Native Born White Americans can do just fine without the South Asians in the US. In fact we did great things when there were hardly any South Asians in the US. And, I am most definitely an enthusiast for deporting the South Asian Fifth Column.

No, I'm saying why you would trust an investigation lead by the Indian immigrant Shyam Sunder over Native Born White Americans like Paul Craig Roberts and other Native Born White American Architects and Engineers for Truth.

Your uncertainty is completely appropriate because anything to do with my very decent and balanced friend is really irrelevant except that I was showing what kind of relaxed sceptic I am on matters to do with the Ukraine; I.e. I couldn't even be bothered to try some of this blogs ideas on him.

But I am a little intrigued though by your interest in the subject. My friends interests are very much centred on Australia.

No Christians in America….0 probability of Viet Nam war ever occuring!!!!!

No Jews in America….0 probability of WWII ever occuring!!!!!

No Italians in America….0 probability of your dinner ever arriving!!!!!

Executive summary: original statement is stupid and bigoted.
!!!!!

I plead guilty to being bigoted…racist…and racially zenophobic…I am a racial nationalist…Just like the rest of the Human Population on the Planet including places such as China and South Korea.

There is no Golden Moral Rule in Immigration Policy. No one believes in that nonsense. Native Born White Americans are not logically commited to obeying the South Asian Fifth Column’s “Divine” Edict that Whitey commit demographic suicide within the borders of the US… Does America now belong to the Hindu?

There is an " MIT School of Engineering ", consisting of about 9 different Departments, e.g. Dept. of Mechanical Engineering, etc. , seehttp://engineering.mit.edu/academics-research None of them has the name "Department of Engineering".

There is syntactic and semantic symmetry to this particular phrasing…it passes the Native Speaker’s Native syntactic intuition test.

@Cagey Beast
Interesting but fwiw you would be wrong about my friend (it's hard to believe a former professor of accounting and finance has such a sunny disposition). He's so integrated into Australian life and ways that he has even written a book on an Australian WW1 war hero and a close friend of both of us just assumed for decades that he was Orthodox until (because I happened to have asked) I was able to put him right.

I quite like the Ukrainians and Ukrainian-Canadians with roots I’ve met over the years. In fact I had Christmas dinner in the home of a Ukrainian Catholic family not many miles from that UPA monument I linked to in an earlier comment. The point is that everyone has a perspective and a provenance and these have to be taken into account when you judge their version of things.

As to whether or not your friend’s speaking trip to Ukraine was financed by the CIA, who knows? I very much doubt he’d know himself. There’s such an elaborate web of foundations, endowments, etc that I’d bet the Director of the CIA would have trouble telling you. There’s so much funny money sloshing around that I doubt anyone knows where it all comes from, let alone where it all goes. I’m sure there are swimming pools in the south of France paid for out of one or another of these funds for the promotion of democratic institutions in the former East Bloc.

I could never have said it any better about the funny money "for the promotion of democratic institutions in the former Eastern Bloc". As with all "assistance money", some of it ends up the pockets and in the villas of the hard-working-regime-changers of the NED etc. Some of those guys now even own private islands in the equatorial Pacific (I believe that they did not have to do any land reclamation, like China).

It all really comes down to how long will the people be paying for their own occupation by using US$ as a principal exchange medium. When the US$ gets replaced by Yuan and/or Bitcoin, things may start changing.

I don't dispute the theoretical possibility that someone like my Australian-Ukrainian friend had a trip to the Ukraine for which the funding was not himself and perhaps not known to him. And one couldn't exclude the CIA because we have known for a long time of the excellent work they helped finance in the shape of magazines like Encounter and, in Australia, Quadrant.

I have always been more impressed by the perfect anonymous negotiability of money than who earned it or had it in the bank for donations. True, there are plenty of prejudices one should be aware of if not share if one is not to run into trouble n politics or reputation, or even wrt the criminal law. When Gough Whitlam, a giant of a man in a number of ways, was the very flawed PM of Australia he not only got marked down heavily (and did lose an election badly only three years after being elected) for the Khemlani loans affair which involved a very nationalist and old fashioned socialist colleague trying to borrow several billions of petro dollars through a thoroughly shady intermediary in order to finance a trans-Australian pipeline he was subsequently found to be soliciting donations to the Labor Party from Iraq. A bad look,

Moi, I would be more inclined to try and take credit for taking money from one's enemies, or at least from one's potential critics' enemies!

Your analysis of anything at all is too often undermined by your failure to write as though you have read what you write about and to be conscientious in your representation of other people's views.

Can you not see the irrelevance of your self-satisfied autodidacts' views about the susceptibility to brain washing of various people. (As it happens Australians have a now-perhaps-somewhat-outdated reputation for irreverent scepticism. Any generalisations should be warily made even by those who have fully digested the impact of huge - and not unfavourable - ethnic changes while Australia's population has tripled since 1946. If you knew Australia you would know how many judges and lawyers for example regard their Canadian counterparts as piously PC. You would know that Australians are hardly even to be measured on the same scale as a nation which is more like an empire in which there are insular groups of absolutely stunning ignorance about other countries. Religion-free Australians' crime and incarceration rate is minuscule compared with that of the US with its mad fundamentalists, descendants of slaves and Latino peasants. But it seems you have confidence in your methods).

To be specific you seem to have got off on some fantasy that I was portraying something as reliable which only says something about you and your standards. I merely profferred the chance for people to listen to a Russian speaking journalist in the Ukraine and either learn something, take pause for thought, or give a reasoned and knowledge opinion about what Oliver Bullough had to say.

It doesn't help your credibility that you obviously know nothing about Late Night Live or the almost total ideological separation (albeit of the non-bloodletting kind) between the ABC which is state owned (as is SBS with its emphasis on ethnic variety and foreign language programs) and the remnants of traditional MSM. The Murdoch press sells by far the greatest numbers of daily newspapers including the leading national broadsheet but has far fewer employees than the ABC which it often criticises (the affection is mutual). The Fairfax newspapers are increasingly catering to urban lefties who probably vote Green.

Phillip Adams does indeed have some conformist views like the crusade [his word] he has conducted on AGW (aka "climate change" by the slippery) since the 1980s but he is dead against the "War on Drugs", capital punishment, mandatory sentences, locking up boat people which do not line him up with the mainstream majority voter in Australia (though capital punishment is no more likely to be restored than Australia is likely to liberalise its gun laws - rightly because the US problem is one that starts with hundreds of millions of guns in private hands and that does not apply in Australia. Sorry to go a bit off track but you obviously represent a vast web of ignorance about Australia).

So whatever point you would like to make about the oh-so-interesting working of your mind you really haven't found a good hook on which to hang your exposition.

Wiz of Oz: “It doesn’t help your credibility that you obviously know nothing about Late Night Live …”

Fantastic.

So you firmly reject what your ears heard when Mrs. Nuland-Kagan from the US State Department had been selecting a “democratically elected” oligarch in Ukraine, and you firmly reject what your eyes saw what happened in Odessa when neo-Nazis made modern-day auto da fe to burn the pro-federalists alive (the Ukrainian neo-Nazis are cordially supported by Ukrainian diaspora that includes progeny of the former Nazi collaborators) .

Was you close friend a recipient of the US State Dept. largesse (see $5bln. doled to Ukrainian NGO and such) or is he into finances (IMF, austerity, the “disappeared” Ukrainian gold reserve) or mineral resources acquisitions (Biden and Co, Monsanto, and other delectable names)?

It is a lost cause to try to explain anything to this character. He is stooped in government propaganda and when someone tries to explain something to him he comes back with a torrent of diminishment etc. It is really hard to understand why he is visiting this alternative-to-MSM-website if he rejects views against the established government propaganda. He accuses others (me) of the lack of knowledge but he desperately holds on to his dear prejudices as a mental-health life line.

The Australian MSM have been an ardent follower of the US Government line on Ukraine. I feel like puking sometimes watching the reports about Ukraine, because they are so repulsive, so manipulative, so full of outright, blatant, morality-free lies. For the sake of an image of plurality, they sometimes do broadcast a non-blaming report about the skirmishes on the division line between the Eastern Ukrainians and the US appointed government in Kiev. But they almost never show the deaths by the bombardment of the civilian areas by the US puppets and Nazis, or if they do show them they do not mention the nationality of the killed and imply that the country of Russia is to blame for this as well.

In short, Australia is as brainwashed as any Anglo-country. The British propaganda is one of the top three most ruthless in the World, but it is funny that an average British subject is less brainwashed than his colonial counterpart, an Australian or a Canadian.

Kiza (I think it is) wonders why I bother with the Unz Review and I propose to give him a short factual answer. But I have to admit that I get a ghoulish enjoyment out of seeing whether, just once, I might extract an admission that a blog comment has been ill-informed or plain illogical. Thus I note that the passage of mine that you quote concerning Kiza's want of (apparent) knowledge of Late Night Live has no logical connection with what you say next unless there are a whole lot of premises hidden in a fevered imagination.

I refer to your mention of the Australian Broadcasting Corporation's "Late Night Live" and make the assumption that you might want to know more about it. I am about to provide more information to Kiza who seemed to include it in his scoff about Australians being brainwashed by the MSM.

What I trust is the scientific method. I think what you are trying to do is:I GOTTCHA!!!..The South Asians are indispensable...whitey can't survive without them ha ha!!!

Native Born White Americans can do just fine without the South Asians in the US. In fact we did great things when there were hardly any South Asians in the US. And, I am most definitely an enthusiast for deporting the South Asian Fifth Column.

Truther "science" is "scientific" sewage.

No, I’m saying why you would trust an investigation lead by the Indian immigrant Shyam Sunder over Native Born White Americans like Paul Craig Roberts and other Native Born White American Architects and Engineers for Truth.

Wiz of Oz: "It doesn’t help your credibility that you obviously know nothing about Late Night Live ..."

Fantastic.

So you firmly reject what your ears heard when Mrs. Nuland-Kagan from the US State Department had been selecting a "democratically elected" oligarch in Ukraine, and you firmly reject what your eyes saw what happened in Odessa when neo-Nazis made modern-day auto da fe to burn the pro-federalists alive (the Ukrainian neo-Nazis are cordially supported by Ukrainian diaspora that includes progeny of the former Nazi collaborators) .https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=inpRs9D4u-A

Was you close friend a recipient of the US State Dept. largesse (see $5bln. doled to Ukrainian NGO and such) or is he into finances (IMF, austerity, the "disappeared" Ukrainian gold reserve) or mineral resources acquisitions (Biden and Co, Monsanto, and other delectable names)? http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-11-18/ukraine-admits-its-gold-gone

Hello annamarina,

It is a lost cause to try to explain anything to this character. He is stooped in government propaganda and when someone tries to explain something to him he comes back with a torrent of diminishment etc. It is really hard to understand why he is visiting this alternative-to-MSM-website if he rejects views against the established government propaganda. He accuses others (me) of the lack of knowledge but he desperately holds on to his dear prejudices as a mental-health life line.

The Australian MSM have been an ardent follower of the US Government line on Ukraine. I feel like puking sometimes watching the reports about Ukraine, because they are so repulsive, so manipulative, so full of outright, blatant, morality-free lies. For the sake of an image of plurality, they sometimes do broadcast a non-blaming report about the skirmishes on the division line between the Eastern Ukrainians and the US appointed government in Kiev. But they almost never show the deaths by the bombardment of the civilian areas by the US puppets and Nazis, or if they do show them they do not mention the nationality of the killed and imply that the country of Russia is to blame for this as well.

In short, Australia is as brainwashed as any Anglo-country. The British propaganda is one of the top three most ruthless in the World, but it is funny that an average British subject is less brainwashed than his colonial counterpart, an Australian or a Canadian.

@Kiza who wonders why I bother about a website that offers alternative views to those found in the MSM (I would question the view that the MSM is anything like monolithic if, by supposing it is, one is denying that you can find dissenting views).

That is surely a rather naive view, at odds with what one can readily observe in most thinking human beings. As it happens I wouldn't bother about the Unz Review if I counted on learning anything worth the time spent reading from more than about one in ten blog comments. But I have corresponded with about six of the regular named contributors for many years and some of them I can count as more than electronic friends. I respect them and their care and honesty even if I don't always agree with them. Also what Ron achieved for a number of years with The American Conservative was enough to make me eager to try the Unz Review. While I remember Ron saying very rude things about both Israel and neo-cons I wonder how long he will put up with the deranged anti-Semitic tone of some of the blog commentators. Just at first glance a few months ago a Jewish medical specialist of the old thoroughly Australian community (old Anglican private school etc.) whom I had told about the Unz Review voiced the succinct view that it was a "forum for people who want to kill me"!

My respect for Ron will keep me reading the Unz Review though I may seek out methods to skip a lot of the comments. It is after all a bit self-indulgent to entertain oneself by conducting experiments more for one's entertainment than in the ezpectation of learning something important. I spent a bit too much time baiting a lefty professor of economics and his pious acolytes, often on AGW, until switching satirical sock puppets became too much trouble. Back in my electronic youth I used to have a bit of fun with the solemn by for example assuring them that I knew Professor XYZ who had been deriding their views and knew him as a genius and leading authority with a wicked sense of humour which unfortunately he was probably exercising to show his complete disdain and contempt for amateur pundits infesting the blog. That kind of nastiness never got found out to the best of my knowledge. I don't do it now.

I don't know what your interest in Ukrainian matters is. Whatever it is it doesn't seem to open your eyes to the obvious. I am not very interested in the truth about who did what when in that country or even why. I am sure there is no earth shatteringly strange truth to be discovered that will be critical to a full mature understanding about the way the world works. And whatever your experience of the Australian media I can assure you that the average Aussie is not brainwashed on the subject by the MSM because if my combined score on a scale measuring interest and knowledge is 35 per cent his is about 5 per cent.

Mind you the PM got a bit of a lift out of getting in early with tough words about the Russian backed rebels downing of the Malaysian airlines flight from Amsterdam. After all there were one and a half passengers travelling to Australia for a conference or some such Oz connection....

I quite like the Ukrainians and Ukrainian-Canadians with roots I've met over the years. In fact I had Christmas dinner in the home of a Ukrainian Catholic family not many miles from that UPA monument I linked to in an earlier comment. The point is that everyone has a perspective and a provenance and these have to be taken into account when you judge their version of things.

As to whether or not your friend's speaking trip to Ukraine was financed by the CIA, who knows? I very much doubt he'd know himself. There's such an elaborate web of foundations, endowments, etc that I'd bet the Director of the CIA would have trouble telling you. There's so much funny money sloshing around that I doubt anyone knows where it all comes from, let alone where it all goes. I'm sure there are swimming pools in the south of France paid for out of one or another of these funds for the promotion of democratic institutions in the former East Bloc.

I could never have said it any better about the funny money “for the promotion of democratic institutions in the former Eastern Bloc”. As with all “assistance money”, some of it ends up the pockets and in the villas of the hard-working-regime-changers of the NED etc. Some of those guys now even own private islands in the equatorial Pacific (I believe that they did not have to do any land reclamation, like China).

It all really comes down to how long will the people be paying for their own occupation by using US$ as a principal exchange medium. When the US$ gets replaced by Yuan and/or Bitcoin, things may start changing.

Your analysis of anything at all is too often undermined by your failure to write as though you have read what you write about and to be conscientious in your representation of other people's views.

Can you not see the irrelevance of your self-satisfied autodidacts' views about the susceptibility to brain washing of various people. (As it happens Australians have a now-perhaps-somewhat-outdated reputation for irreverent scepticism. Any generalisations should be warily made even by those who have fully digested the impact of huge - and not unfavourable - ethnic changes while Australia's population has tripled since 1946. If you knew Australia you would know how many judges and lawyers for example regard their Canadian counterparts as piously PC. You would know that Australians are hardly even to be measured on the same scale as a nation which is more like an empire in which there are insular groups of absolutely stunning ignorance about other countries. Religion-free Australians' crime and incarceration rate is minuscule compared with that of the US with its mad fundamentalists, descendants of slaves and Latino peasants. But it seems you have confidence in your methods).

To be specific you seem to have got off on some fantasy that I was portraying something as reliable which only says something about you and your standards. I merely profferred the chance for people to listen to a Russian speaking journalist in the Ukraine and either learn something, take pause for thought, or give a reasoned and knowledge opinion about what Oliver Bullough had to say.

It doesn't help your credibility that you obviously know nothing about Late Night Live or the almost total ideological separation (albeit of the non-bloodletting kind) between the ABC which is state owned (as is SBS with its emphasis on ethnic variety and foreign language programs) and the remnants of traditional MSM. The Murdoch press sells by far the greatest numbers of daily newspapers including the leading national broadsheet but has far fewer employees than the ABC which it often criticises (the affection is mutual). The Fairfax newspapers are increasingly catering to urban lefties who probably vote Green.

Phillip Adams does indeed have some conformist views like the crusade [his word] he has conducted on AGW (aka "climate change" by the slippery) since the 1980s but he is dead against the "War on Drugs", capital punishment, mandatory sentences, locking up boat people which do not line him up with the mainstream majority voter in Australia (though capital punishment is no more likely to be restored than Australia is likely to liberalise its gun laws - rightly because the US problem is one that starts with hundreds of millions of guns in private hands and that does not apply in Australia. Sorry to go a bit off track but you obviously represent a vast web of ignorance about Australia).

So whatever point you would like to make about the oh-so-interesting working of your mind you really haven't found a good hook on which to hang your exposition.

Well, maybe things about me are the way you describe.

But, I will still continue expressing my (according to you, self-serving) views not because of you then because I want something opposite to MSM to be heard. I feel a duty to reject the establishment’s propaganda and to put forward an opposite point of view, this is my motivation.

Your obviously hold dearly to this view of Australia as a larrikin, Ned Kelly country, incapable of understanding that faced with the power of modern propaganda and brainwashing, the Australians are like children. I agree with you that Australia is a nation of tribes, which brings non-homogeneity in the views, but the MSM bring this back in line.

I know that you will jump at this statement of mine as well, but I have worked in the Australian media and know them fairly well. The main government medium ABC used to be a left-wing organization, until cost cutting and purges by both Liberal Party and Labor Party made it a pure government tool of propaganda. Its fate is amazingly similar to BBC’s. (In general, whatever method of governance is developed in Britain, a few years later it gets transplanted into Australia.)

But the second semi-government, semi-commercial medium, SBS which you mention, is a much more interesting experiment. Started as an ethnic channel, it got transformed into a semi-cultural, semi-globalist-propaganda channel (New World Order Channel). Its former director, a Brit with Intelligence origins, steered it in the direction of the most ruthless propaganda channel in Australia. The biggest success of this channel has been a fantastic combination of anti-globalist documentaries and pro-globalist-news, an amazingly successful propagandistic schizophrenia, which attracted the top-intellectual-tier audience of the country (the intellectuals of Australia). The principal agenda of this globalist propaganda appears to be the one-world-under-Anglo-tutelage, a kind of British-Empire-Redux, which uses the US Military as its global police.

I have to stop here, but without patronizing you I wish you a more open mindset, fewer myths and prejudices, and more preparedness to engage in a real debate: to counter the opposite view without diminishing its holder.

First, the best propaganda is the one you have no idea it is propaganda (e.g. SBS, Eric Margolis etc), because it delivers propaganda in parallel with your established views, not perpendicular to your views.

Second, with all my criticism of Australia, it is at least 100 times better than the US. As a society, Australia is much better for all the reasons that you mention, plus those that you do not mention. Unfortunately, it is being dragged into the same hell-hole to which the US is going.

Third, an alliance of Anglo-Jewish oligarchs, with necons as their Jesuit-like religious order, are driving the World towards human extinction. Also, humans had this dangerous nuclear toy in their immature hands just for too long. The cockroaches may finally get a chance to replace us like we replaced the dinosaurs. Ukraine is one good step on this path towards extinction of our species.

I appreciate your taking the trouble to display some real knowledge unpatronisingly even if I don't agree (or disagree) with you about some/much of it.

But you do read a bit more of what you want to read than what is there. I do not treasure, or even believe in, the old larrikin tradition idea as a still relevant way of working out how Australians might think.

I had in the past, reason to attend a number of presentations by professionals in advertising and PR who had a very good idea of where people got their "news" from. It was always likely that the average voter would get a few minutes before dinner from a commercial channel while doing the family's ironing. And now that very few people read newspapers I suppose one has to be increasingly certain that it is prejudices acquired more or less unconsciously, probably from unionised lefty teachers and the occasional inspiring crank or Pied Piper, which dominate their thinking (if they do any) about potentially important public matters.

I am not able to confirm or deny your characterisation of SBS which is often joked about for the way it introduced nudity and sex from surprising countries like Spain into late evening viewing! As far as I am concerned it is mostly viewable for programs like those of Michael Mosley on medically related matters (fast fitness and 2:5 fasting etc) and programs on archaeology or history.

One of my friends who has his own small think tank and was a very senior public servant notes that the ABC is still conventionally to the left in, e.g. not dealing with Australia's industrial relations scene in which a little oligarchy of careerist survive on state supported unionism and the money it provides to help them form left of centre governments (admittedly with problems from the Greens on the left of most of them). He also points to the ABC's deficiencies on matters of so-called climate science and a few other areas. Again, I remain somewhat agnostic because I tend to be sceptical of almost everything including medical and legal advice.....

I do tend to see my right of centre friends and colleagues as rather pathetically uncritical of the US and its leaders. I put it down to their being wet behind the ears (even if successful lawyers or business people) and inadequately resistant to duchessing.

Given that people's ways of understanding things are often set early and remarkably resistant to evidence even for intelligent people (think after life providing rewards and punishments, think God creating the world and actually caring about us, think of the heroism of your forebears in killing Turks, Germans, Native Americans...... and so on and on) I can see why there might be a natural pro-Anglosphere view in an English speaking nation like Australia quite regardless of the fact that its most enthusiastic promoters are often from second generation Australian families, Greek, Jewish, Ukrainian....

I think you may be one of those people who do not give enough credit to the possibility that both by temperament and calculation there will always be quite a lot of people in a relatively free society who will rejoice in being contrarian or at least, rejoice in finding something different from the mainstream view. That one my be proved wrong after a lifetime accepting some standard views can be hugely enjoyable for people like me.

I know a lot of Jews but perhaps not the "Anglo-Jewish oligarchs" you refer to. When I raised about 12 years ago the place of Jews in the neo-con push on Bush for ME war a Jewish newspaper editor who was thoroughly Australian, thoroughly Jewish and had been a foreign correspondent in the US for a number of years made the simple point that Rumsfeld and Cheney weren't Jews.. Not a bad riposte as far as it went. And a close relation of mine working for the BBC was quite contemptuous of Richard Perle's demands for money for interviews. But the BBC certainly couldn't be accused of being pro-Israeli despite it being a natural home for Jewish talent.....

But, I will still continue expressing my (according to you, self-serving) views not because of you then because I want something opposite to MSM to be heard. I feel a duty to reject the establishment's propaganda and to put forward an opposite point of view, this is my motivation.

Your obviously hold dearly to this view of Australia as a larrikin, Ned Kelly country, incapable of understanding that faced with the power of modern propaganda and brainwashing, the Australians are like children. I agree with you that Australia is a nation of tribes, which brings non-homogeneity in the views, but the MSM bring this back in line.

I know that you will jump at this statement of mine as well, but I have worked in the Australian media and know them fairly well. The main government medium ABC used to be a left-wing organization, until cost cutting and purges by both Liberal Party and Labor Party made it a pure government tool of propaganda. Its fate is amazingly similar to BBC's. (In general, whatever method of governance is developed in Britain, a few years later it gets transplanted into Australia.)

But the second semi-government, semi-commercial medium, SBS which you mention, is a much more interesting experiment. Started as an ethnic channel, it got transformed into a semi-cultural, semi-globalist-propaganda channel (New World Order Channel). Its former director, a Brit with Intelligence origins, steered it in the direction of the most ruthless propaganda channel in Australia. The biggest success of this channel has been a fantastic combination of anti-globalist documentaries and pro-globalist-news, an amazingly successful propagandistic schizophrenia, which attracted the top-intellectual-tier audience of the country (the intellectuals of Australia). The principal agenda of this globalist propaganda appears to be the one-world-under-Anglo-tutelage, a kind of British-Empire-Redux, which uses the US Military as its global police.

I have to stop here, but without patronizing you I wish you a more open mindset, fewer myths and prejudices, and more preparedness to engage in a real debate: to counter the opposite view without diminishing its holder.

Just three extra points, in case I failed to make myself clear.

First, the best propaganda is the one you have no idea it is propaganda (e.g. SBS, Eric Margolis etc), because it delivers propaganda in parallel with your established views, not perpendicular to your views.

Second, with all my criticism of Australia, it is at least 100 times better than the US. As a society, Australia is much better for all the reasons that you mention, plus those that you do not mention. Unfortunately, it is being dragged into the same hell-hole to which the US is going.

Third, an alliance of Anglo-Jewish oligarchs, with necons as their Jesuit-like religious order, are driving the World towards human extinction. Also, humans had this dangerous nuclear toy in their immature hands just for too long. The cockroaches may finally get a chance to replace us like we replaced the dinosaurs. Ukraine is one good step on this path towards extinction of our species.

“Ukraine is one good step on this path towards extinction of our species.”

Absolutely correct, sadly. But the unaccountable psychopaths-in-charge are not able to comprehend this. For the ruling idiots – these egotistic lunatics – there are always some slaves or gullible altruists that are ready to clean any mess. The problem is, we are approaching a kind of a mess that is universally deadly for the humankind, however much efforts and sacrifices the good people are ready to give.
It is doubtful that the war-profiteers and big-time financiers are interested in any reasoning that could adversely affect their baseline.

The great US biologist E.O. Wilson once observed:
“The real problem of humanity is the following: we have paleolithic emotions; medieval institutions; and god-like technology. And it is terrifically dangerous, and it is now approaching a point of crisis overall."

I quite like the Ukrainians and Ukrainian-Canadians with roots I've met over the years. In fact I had Christmas dinner in the home of a Ukrainian Catholic family not many miles from that UPA monument I linked to in an earlier comment. The point is that everyone has a perspective and a provenance and these have to be taken into account when you judge their version of things.

As to whether or not your friend's speaking trip to Ukraine was financed by the CIA, who knows? I very much doubt he'd know himself. There's such an elaborate web of foundations, endowments, etc that I'd bet the Director of the CIA would have trouble telling you. There's so much funny money sloshing around that I doubt anyone knows where it all comes from, let alone where it all goes. I'm sure there are swimming pools in the south of France paid for out of one or another of these funds for the promotion of democratic institutions in the former East Bloc.

I don’t dispute the theoretical possibility that someone like my Australian-Ukrainian friend had a trip to the Ukraine for which the funding was not himself and perhaps not known to him. And one couldn’t exclude the CIA because we have known for a long time of the excellent work they helped finance in the shape of magazines like Encounter and, in Australia, Quadrant.

I have always been more impressed by the perfect anonymous negotiability of money than who earned it or had it in the bank for donations. True, there are plenty of prejudices one should be aware of if not share if one is not to run into trouble n politics or reputation, or even wrt the criminal law. When Gough Whitlam, a giant of a man in a number of ways, was the very flawed PM of Australia he not only got marked down heavily (and did lose an election badly only three years after being elected) for the Khemlani loans affair which involved a very nationalist and old fashioned socialist colleague trying to borrow several billions of petro dollars through a thoroughly shady intermediary in order to finance a trans-Australian pipeline he was subsequently found to be soliciting donations to the Labor Party from Iraq. A bad look,

Moi, I would be more inclined to try and take credit for taking money from one’s enemies, or at least from one’s potential critics’ enemies!

But, I will still continue expressing my (according to you, self-serving) views not because of you then because I want something opposite to MSM to be heard. I feel a duty to reject the establishment's propaganda and to put forward an opposite point of view, this is my motivation.

Your obviously hold dearly to this view of Australia as a larrikin, Ned Kelly country, incapable of understanding that faced with the power of modern propaganda and brainwashing, the Australians are like children. I agree with you that Australia is a nation of tribes, which brings non-homogeneity in the views, but the MSM bring this back in line.

I know that you will jump at this statement of mine as well, but I have worked in the Australian media and know them fairly well. The main government medium ABC used to be a left-wing organization, until cost cutting and purges by both Liberal Party and Labor Party made it a pure government tool of propaganda. Its fate is amazingly similar to BBC's. (In general, whatever method of governance is developed in Britain, a few years later it gets transplanted into Australia.)

But the second semi-government, semi-commercial medium, SBS which you mention, is a much more interesting experiment. Started as an ethnic channel, it got transformed into a semi-cultural, semi-globalist-propaganda channel (New World Order Channel). Its former director, a Brit with Intelligence origins, steered it in the direction of the most ruthless propaganda channel in Australia. The biggest success of this channel has been a fantastic combination of anti-globalist documentaries and pro-globalist-news, an amazingly successful propagandistic schizophrenia, which attracted the top-intellectual-tier audience of the country (the intellectuals of Australia). The principal agenda of this globalist propaganda appears to be the one-world-under-Anglo-tutelage, a kind of British-Empire-Redux, which uses the US Military as its global police.

I have to stop here, but without patronizing you I wish you a more open mindset, fewer myths and prejudices, and more preparedness to engage in a real debate: to counter the opposite view without diminishing its holder.

I appreciate your taking the trouble to display some real knowledge unpatronisingly even if I don’t agree (or disagree) with you about some/much of it.

But you do read a bit more of what you want to read than what is there. I do not treasure, or even believe in, the old larrikin tradition idea as a still relevant way of working out how Australians might think.

I had in the past, reason to attend a number of presentations by professionals in advertising and PR who had a very good idea of where people got their “news” from. It was always likely that the average voter would get a few minutes before dinner from a commercial channel while doing the family’s ironing. And now that very few people read newspapers I suppose one has to be increasingly certain that it is prejudices acquired more or less unconsciously, probably from unionised lefty teachers and the occasional inspiring crank or Pied Piper, which dominate their thinking (if they do any) about potentially important public matters.

I am not able to confirm or deny your characterisation of SBS which is often joked about for the way it introduced nudity and sex from surprising countries like Spain into late evening viewing! As far as I am concerned it is mostly viewable for programs like those of Michael Mosley on medically related matters (fast fitness and 2:5 fasting etc) and programs on archaeology or history.

One of my friends who has his own small think tank and was a very senior public servant notes that the ABC is still conventionally to the left in, e.g. not dealing with Australia’s industrial relations scene in which a little oligarchy of careerist survive on state supported unionism and the money it provides to help them form left of centre governments (admittedly with problems from the Greens on the left of most of them). He also points to the ABC’s deficiencies on matters of so-called climate science and a few other areas. Again, I remain somewhat agnostic because I tend to be sceptical of almost everything including medical and legal advice…..

I do tend to see my right of centre friends and colleagues as rather pathetically uncritical of the US and its leaders. I put it down to their being wet behind the ears (even if successful lawyers or business people) and inadequately resistant to duchessing.

Given that people’s ways of understanding things are often set early and remarkably resistant to evidence even for intelligent people (think after life providing rewards and punishments, think God creating the world and actually caring about us, think of the heroism of your forebears in killing Turks, Germans, Native Americans…… and so on and on) I can see why there might be a natural pro-Anglosphere view in an English speaking nation like Australia quite regardless of the fact that its most enthusiastic promoters are often from second generation Australian families, Greek, Jewish, Ukrainian….

I think you may be one of those people who do not give enough credit to the possibility that both by temperament and calculation there will always be quite a lot of people in a relatively free society who will rejoice in being contrarian or at least, rejoice in finding something different from the mainstream view. That one my be proved wrong after a lifetime accepting some standard views can be hugely enjoyable for people like me.

I know a lot of Jews but perhaps not the “Anglo-Jewish oligarchs” you refer to. When I raised about 12 years ago the place of Jews in the neo-con push on Bush for ME war a Jewish newspaper editor who was thoroughly Australian, thoroughly Jewish and had been a foreign correspondent in the US for a number of years made the simple point that Rumsfeld and Cheney weren’t Jews.. Not a bad riposte as far as it went. And a close relation of mine working for the BBC was quite contemptuous of Richard Perle’s demands for money for interviews. But the BBC certainly couldn’t be accused of being pro-Israeli despite it being a natural home for Jewish talent…..

"Given that people’s ways of understanding things are often set early and remarkably resistant to evidence even for intelligent people..."
This is a nice observation and a valid generalization. A few others are good too.

Other than this, you may have misunderstood my point about Anglo-Jewish oligarchy. Naturally, there are many Jews and many Anglos who oppose such oligarchy and are equally its victims as you and I. This oligarchy is of only one race - the race of nutcases.

People who are their employees (US Government, the Senate and the Congress) all suffer from the Group Think, whilst the general population has no idea what is going on. I do believe that there could even be a revolution because these nut cases are gambling with the fate of all of us by playing an extremely dangerous game of nuclear brinkmanship, a.k.a. nuclear chicken. They are very, very rich and very, very powerful (control a lot of resources), but I simply do not believe that those nutcases are competent enough to avoid causing a nuclear war that they keep playing with.

Even if they do not, I do not want them to be taking such risk and for what?

Perhaps the US/Russia conflict in Ukraine is a case when you need to believe your lying eyes and your lying ears. 1. "Fuck the EU!" (original File) - Victoria Nuland phoning with Geoffrey Pyatthttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KIvRljAaNgg2. "Regime Change in Kiev, Victoria Nuland Admits: US Has Invested $5 Billion In The Development of Ukrainian, "Democratic Institutions:" http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article37599.htm3. A cherry on a pie (in memory of the US sacrifices during the WWII): "U.S. House Admits Nazi Role in Ukraine:" https://consortiumnews.com/2015/06/12/u-s-house-admits-nazi-role-in-ukraine/4. "Stratfor’s George Friedman Fingers US Complicity For Ukraine Coup D’etat:" http://thenewsdoctors.com/stratfors-george-friedman-fingers-us-responsibility-for-ukraine-coup-detat/

Some bug prevented an earlier reply to your post with its interesting links. I shall try to be as thorough as I was in my first effort.

The case you are trying to make and the evidence you are adducing reminds me of the problem found in many areas of disputation wherein the weakness of what is supposed to be conclusive actually undermines a case which is not necessarily wholly wrong.

For example, the fact that a State Department person is caught saying “Fuck the EU” proves nothing to my mind except that on one of the hourly occasions on which a US government person expressed strong disdain for, or irritation with, the EU one of them was unprofessionally careless and got herself recorded. It really is tabloid stuff to shout Gotcha over Gordon Brown during an election campaign calling a Labor supporting woman a bigot and being recorded, or the French diplomat calling Israel “a shitty little country”.

And what’s new about nasty people, like neo-Nazis (whom I will assume to be nasty even if they are really anti-Kaganovich children of the Holodomor with a background we know very little about) being on the US side? Was it every otherwise in Latin America? Gee, we had Stalin and his NKVD on side in WW2.

As for Strafor’s George Friedman the key word seems to be “coup”. I naturally did a search to see if Stratfor or George Friedman had any relevant denial, confirmation or other comment to make. Nothing I could find though maybe there was something after the dozen pro-Russian websites that repeated what Friedman is supposed to have said. But, again, so what? Let’s look at two problems.

One is that the word coup which is used in the game of bridge and other games and also used to describe, for example, a successful takeover, has not necessary implication of illegality or violence.

A second is that when you take the trouble to read Stratfor’s published pieces on Ukraine you will find a measured view based on how the interests of the US and Russia are perceived to clash. It is perfectly capable of supporting my interim view that the US didn’t know nearly enough about Russian or the Ukraine to pull off a coup which would not provoke a very strong reaction from Russia which one can readily accept would be worried about the Ukraine not only aligning its economy with the EU but potentially joining NATO and even having US troops based there. It could well be enough for Putin to put two and two together and add them to 5 when he saw how much money was being poured into NGOs with, as some have pointed out, apparently little attempt to downgrade the excessive power of corrupt oligarchs (or even honest oligarch billionaires). My criticism of the US is that it has overstretched itself for a long time and has neither the economic or military strength or the information or properly deployed brains to make over the world without much damage. China certainly should have been enlisted early for the policing of the world. Russia is a declining power and could surely have been handled with some tact and patience, albeit cynically, so the obvious solution in the Ukraine would seem agreeable; i.e. free trade with the EU and much devolution of regional and municipal government but non-alignment reaffirmed. Yes, probably more US fault than Russia’s in the formation and execution of policy even if – surely – we would be happier with the Ukraine turning into a Poland, or even Bulgaria, than a Belarus.

So for you the most important fact about the Nuland-Kagan conversation with Pyatt was her profane quip towards the EU. Well, this explains why there is no common denominator between your "surface" understanding of the US/RF conflict in Ukraine and the reality-based assessment of the conflict by Paul Craig Roberts and even by such odious figure as Friedman.

You may want to check a time-frame for your definition of the Ukrainian neo-Nazis as the "anti-Kaganovich children of the Holodomor" (1932 then - 2015 now; the WWII in between). And of course, your reference to the murderous Soviet leader Lazar Kaganovich could be complemented by a reference to a wealthy Israeli/Ukrainian citizen that has been sponsoring the neo-Nazis-infested battalions fighting the east Ukraine federalists. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/ukraine/11025137/Ukraine-crisis-the-neo-Nazi-brigade-fighting-pro-Russian-separatists.html

"Ukraine is one good step on this path towards extinction of our species."

Absolutely correct, sadly. But the unaccountable psychopaths-in-charge are not able to comprehend this. For the ruling idiots - these egotistic lunatics - there are always some slaves or gullible altruists that are ready to clean any mess. The problem is, we are approaching a kind of a mess that is universally deadly for the humankind, however much efforts and sacrifices the good people are ready to give.It is doubtful that the war-profiteers and big-time financiers are interested in any reasoning that could adversely affect their baseline.

The great US biologist E.O. Wilson once observed:
“The real problem of humanity is the following: we have paleolithic emotions; medieval institutions; and god-like technology. And it is terrifically dangerous, and it is now approaching a point of crisis overall.”

Wiz of Oz: "It doesn’t help your credibility that you obviously know nothing about Late Night Live ..."

Fantastic.

So you firmly reject what your ears heard when Mrs. Nuland-Kagan from the US State Department had been selecting a "democratically elected" oligarch in Ukraine, and you firmly reject what your eyes saw what happened in Odessa when neo-Nazis made modern-day auto da fe to burn the pro-federalists alive (the Ukrainian neo-Nazis are cordially supported by Ukrainian diaspora that includes progeny of the former Nazi collaborators) .https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=inpRs9D4u-A

Was you close friend a recipient of the US State Dept. largesse (see $5bln. doled to Ukrainian NGO and such) or is he into finances (IMF, austerity, the "disappeared" Ukrainian gold reserve) or mineral resources acquisitions (Biden and Co, Monsanto, and other delectable names)? http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-11-18/ukraine-admits-its-gold-gone

@annamarina

Kiza (I think it is) wonders why I bother with the Unz Review and I propose to give him a short factual answer. But I have to admit that I get a ghoulish enjoyment out of seeing whether, just once, I might extract an admission that a blog comment has been ill-informed or plain illogical. Thus I note that the passage of mine that you quote concerning Kiza’s want of (apparent) knowledge of Late Night Live has no logical connection with what you say next unless there are a whole lot of premises hidden in a fevered imagination.

It is a lost cause to try to explain anything to this character. He is stooped in government propaganda and when someone tries to explain something to him he comes back with a torrent of diminishment etc. It is really hard to understand why he is visiting this alternative-to-MSM-website if he rejects views against the established government propaganda. He accuses others (me) of the lack of knowledge but he desperately holds on to his dear prejudices as a mental-health life line.

The Australian MSM have been an ardent follower of the US Government line on Ukraine. I feel like puking sometimes watching the reports about Ukraine, because they are so repulsive, so manipulative, so full of outright, blatant, morality-free lies. For the sake of an image of plurality, they sometimes do broadcast a non-blaming report about the skirmishes on the division line between the Eastern Ukrainians and the US appointed government in Kiev. But they almost never show the deaths by the bombardment of the civilian areas by the US puppets and Nazis, or if they do show them they do not mention the nationality of the killed and imply that the country of Russia is to blame for this as well.

In short, Australia is as brainwashed as any Anglo-country. The British propaganda is one of the top three most ruthless in the World, but it is funny that an average British subject is less brainwashed than his colonial counterpart, an Australian or a Canadian.

who wonders why I bother about a website that offers alternative views to those found in the MSM (I would question the view that the MSM is anything like monolithic if, by supposing it is, one is denying that you can find dissenting views).

That is surely a rather naive view, at odds with what one can readily observe in most thinking human beings. As it happens I wouldn’t bother about the Unz Review if I counted on learning anything worth the time spent reading from more than about one in ten blog comments. But I have corresponded with about six of the regular named contributors for many years and some of them I can count as more than electronic friends. I respect them and their care and honesty even if I don’t always agree with them. Also what Ron achieved for a number of years with The American Conservative was enough to make me eager to try the Unz Review. While I remember Ron saying very rude things about both Israel and neo-cons I wonder how long he will put up with the deranged anti-Semitic tone of some of the blog commentators. Just at first glance a few months ago a Jewish medical specialist of the old thoroughly Australian community (old Anglican private school etc.) whom I had told about the Unz Review voiced the succinct view that it was a “forum for people who want to kill me”!

My respect for Ron will keep me reading the Unz Review though I may seek out methods to skip a lot of the comments. It is after all a bit self-indulgent to entertain oneself by conducting experiments more for one’s entertainment than in the ezpectation of learning something important. I spent a bit too much time baiting a lefty professor of economics and his pious acolytes, often on AGW, until switching satirical sock puppets became too much trouble. Back in my electronic youth I used to have a bit of fun with the solemn by for example assuring them that I knew Professor XYZ who had been deriding their views and knew him as a genius and leading authority with a wicked sense of humour which unfortunately he was probably exercising to show his complete disdain and contempt for amateur pundits infesting the blog. That kind of nastiness never got found out to the best of my knowledge. I don’t do it now.

I don’t know what your interest in Ukrainian matters is. Whatever it is it doesn’t seem to open your eyes to the obvious. I am not very interested in the truth about who did what when in that country or even why. I am sure there is no earth shatteringly strange truth to be discovered that will be critical to a full mature understanding about the way the world works. And whatever your experience of the Australian media I can assure you that the average Aussie is not brainwashed on the subject by the MSM because if my combined score on a scale measuring interest and knowledge is 35 per cent his is about 5 per cent.

Mind you the PM got a bit of a lift out of getting in early with tough words about the Russian backed rebels downing of the Malaysian airlines flight from Amsterdam. After all there were one and a half passengers travelling to Australia for a conference or some such Oz connection….

I appreciate your taking the trouble to display some real knowledge unpatronisingly even if I don't agree (or disagree) with you about some/much of it.

But you do read a bit more of what you want to read than what is there. I do not treasure, or even believe in, the old larrikin tradition idea as a still relevant way of working out how Australians might think.

I had in the past, reason to attend a number of presentations by professionals in advertising and PR who had a very good idea of where people got their "news" from. It was always likely that the average voter would get a few minutes before dinner from a commercial channel while doing the family's ironing. And now that very few people read newspapers I suppose one has to be increasingly certain that it is prejudices acquired more or less unconsciously, probably from unionised lefty teachers and the occasional inspiring crank or Pied Piper, which dominate their thinking (if they do any) about potentially important public matters.

I am not able to confirm or deny your characterisation of SBS which is often joked about for the way it introduced nudity and sex from surprising countries like Spain into late evening viewing! As far as I am concerned it is mostly viewable for programs like those of Michael Mosley on medically related matters (fast fitness and 2:5 fasting etc) and programs on archaeology or history.

One of my friends who has his own small think tank and was a very senior public servant notes that the ABC is still conventionally to the left in, e.g. not dealing with Australia's industrial relations scene in which a little oligarchy of careerist survive on state supported unionism and the money it provides to help them form left of centre governments (admittedly with problems from the Greens on the left of most of them). He also points to the ABC's deficiencies on matters of so-called climate science and a few other areas. Again, I remain somewhat agnostic because I tend to be sceptical of almost everything including medical and legal advice.....

I do tend to see my right of centre friends and colleagues as rather pathetically uncritical of the US and its leaders. I put it down to their being wet behind the ears (even if successful lawyers or business people) and inadequately resistant to duchessing.

Given that people's ways of understanding things are often set early and remarkably resistant to evidence even for intelligent people (think after life providing rewards and punishments, think God creating the world and actually caring about us, think of the heroism of your forebears in killing Turks, Germans, Native Americans...... and so on and on) I can see why there might be a natural pro-Anglosphere view in an English speaking nation like Australia quite regardless of the fact that its most enthusiastic promoters are often from second generation Australian families, Greek, Jewish, Ukrainian....

I think you may be one of those people who do not give enough credit to the possibility that both by temperament and calculation there will always be quite a lot of people in a relatively free society who will rejoice in being contrarian or at least, rejoice in finding something different from the mainstream view. That one my be proved wrong after a lifetime accepting some standard views can be hugely enjoyable for people like me.

I know a lot of Jews but perhaps not the "Anglo-Jewish oligarchs" you refer to. When I raised about 12 years ago the place of Jews in the neo-con push on Bush for ME war a Jewish newspaper editor who was thoroughly Australian, thoroughly Jewish and had been a foreign correspondent in the US for a number of years made the simple point that Rumsfeld and Cheney weren't Jews.. Not a bad riposte as far as it went. And a close relation of mine working for the BBC was quite contemptuous of Richard Perle's demands for money for interviews. But the BBC certainly couldn't be accused of being pro-Israeli despite it being a natural home for Jewish talent.....

“Given that people’s ways of understanding things are often set early and remarkably resistant to evidence even for intelligent people…”
This is a nice observation and a valid generalization. A few others are good too.

Other than this, you may have misunderstood my point about Anglo-Jewish oligarchy. Naturally, there are many Jews and many Anglos who oppose such oligarchy and are equally its victims as you and I. This oligarchy is of only one race – the race of nutcases.

People who are their employees (US Government, the Senate and the Congress) all suffer from the Group Think, whilst the general population has no idea what is going on. I do believe that there could even be a revolution because these nut cases are gambling with the fate of all of us by playing an extremely dangerous game of nuclear brinkmanship, a.k.a. nuclear chicken. They are very, very rich and very, very powerful (control a lot of resources), but I simply do not believe that those nutcases are competent enough to avoid causing a nuclear war that they keep playing with.

Even if they do not, I do not want them to be taking such risk and for what?

Thank you for the elucidation especially about "Anglo-Jewish oligarchy". If I may say so it is an unfortunate expression - approximately 90 per cent over compressed if you didn't want people to think it the words of one of the great conspiracy theorists whom one can hear adding "well we all know don't we"to every second barmy utterance.

However free from tribal feeling and opinion many Jews are you could indeed say that there is a Jewish tribe well beyond Israel though I would heavily qualify any adverse implications of this by noting how readily we slip into tribal mode for part of our persona. Just consider how lawyers who are fierce critics of the legal system will pull on that tribal persona when ignorant laymen make unfair or ill-informed criticisms. It has occurred to me that non-Jews have helped create and reinforce Jewish tribalism and that it may be true to say now that there was never a Palestinian nation, or even people, but that Zionism, or Israel has created one.

But you were focusing on the nutcases rather than the innocent instinctive tribals. There was a multi-millionaire anti gay old man who was offering financial support for candidates to become Illinois' or Chicago's State Attorney in "The Good Wife". I think he was meant to evoke the feelings you would regard as appropriate for some of the rich American buyers of influence for Israel. A nutter who could afford to indulge his nutty whims.

A couple of years ago I was cheerfully told by a biofuels lobbyist in DC that it was her job to make sure that Congressmen didn't have to spend MORE than 90 per cent of their time raising money. Entirely consistent with your thesis because neither the National Rifle Association, nor the Israel lobby would have to own all the members of Congress. What is more, now that SCOTUS has allowed money to be used almost unchecked, it can be so easily used efficiently by merely threatening to support an opposing candidate in the primaries. And there are no doubt many more sophisticated tricks than I know about.

I am a good deal closer to worrying about dysfunction in American government (in many ways at all levels) than anything to do with the Ukraine. As for Israel I concede that there are dangers that unnecessary and unintelligent support for its more belligerent politicians could lead to. But I regard the likelihood of disaster as manageably small even by an Administration with belligerent well-financed warmongering critics - on which lengthily arguable proposition I shall have to defer my half thought out reasons. Let me divert into the speculative.

What if the evangelicals were no longer reliably pro-Israel whatever it does? That's a lot of votes.

And isn't it significant that oil states which are at least as rich as America's Jewish rich haven't bought equal influence? In the immediate context of what appears to be your concern about a nuclear war based on Israel's view of the danger from Iran I suppose the answer is obvious. The Arabs, particularly Sunni, wouldn't mind at all if Israel or the US did significant damage to Iran... (thinking to be continued: I am happy to repeat my earlier post to the effect that what made sense to me was the kind of deal Obama seems to be seeking backed by making the Iranians believe that the first verbal or physical evidences of their having a nuclear weapon would be met with bombing so destructive that no nuclear related facilities would survive regardless of the collateral damage).

The great US biologist E.O. Wilson once observed:
“The real problem of humanity is the following: we have paleolithic emotions; medieval institutions; and god-like technology. And it is terrifically dangerous, and it is now approaching a point of crisis overall."

Some bug prevented an earlier reply to your post with its interesting links. I shall try to be as thorough as I was in my first effort.

The case you are trying to make and the evidence you are adducing reminds me of the problem found in many areas of disputation wherein the weakness of what is supposed to be conclusive actually undermines a case which is not necessarily wholly wrong.

For example, the fact that a State Department person is caught saying "Fuck the EU" proves nothing to my mind except that on one of the hourly occasions on which a US government person expressed strong disdain for, or irritation with, the EU one of them was unprofessionally careless and got herself recorded. It really is tabloid stuff to shout Gotcha over Gordon Brown during an election campaign calling a Labor supporting woman a bigot and being recorded, or the French diplomat calling Israel "a shitty little country".

And what's new about nasty people, like neo-Nazis (whom I will assume to be nasty even if they are really anti-Kaganovich children of the Holodomor with a background we know very little about) being on the US side? Was it every otherwise in Latin America? Gee, we had Stalin and his NKVD on side in WW2.

As for Strafor's George Friedman the key word seems to be "coup". I naturally did a search to see if Stratfor or George Friedman had any relevant denial, confirmation or other comment to make. Nothing I could find though maybe there was something after the dozen pro-Russian websites that repeated what Friedman is supposed to have said. But, again, so what? Let's look at two problems.

One is that the word coup which is used in the game of bridge and other games and also used to describe, for example, a successful takeover, has not necessary implication of illegality or violence.

A second is that when you take the trouble to read Stratfor's published pieces on Ukraine you will find a measured view based on how the interests of the US and Russia are perceived to clash. It is perfectly capable of supporting my interim view that the US didn't know nearly enough about Russian or the Ukraine to pull off a coup which would not provoke a very strong reaction from Russia which one can readily accept would be worried about the Ukraine not only aligning its economy with the EU but potentially joining NATO and even having US troops based there. It could well be enough for Putin to put two and two together and add them to 5 when he saw how much money was being poured into NGOs with, as some have pointed out, apparently little attempt to downgrade the excessive power of corrupt oligarchs (or even honest oligarch billionaires). My criticism of the US is that it has overstretched itself for a long time and has neither the economic or military strength or the information or properly deployed brains to make over the world without much damage. China certainly should have been enlisted early for the policing of the world. Russia is a declining power and could surely have been handled with some tact and patience, albeit cynically, so the obvious solution in the Ukraine would seem agreeable; i.e. free trade with the EU and much devolution of regional and municipal government but non-alignment reaffirmed. Yes, probably more US fault than Russia's in the formation and execution of policy even if - surely - we would be happier with the Ukraine turning into a Poland, or even Bulgaria, than a Belarus.

So for you the most important fact about the Nuland-Kagan conversation with Pyatt was her profane quip towards the EU. Well, this explains why there is no common denominator between your “surface” understanding of the US/RF conflict in Ukraine and the reality-based assessment of the conflict by Paul Craig Roberts and even by such odious figure as Friedman.

You may want to check a time-frame for your definition of the Ukrainian neo-Nazis as the “anti-Kaganovich children of the Holodomor” (1932 then – 2015 now; the WWII in between). And of course, your reference to the murderous Soviet leader Lazar Kaganovich could be complemented by a reference to a wealthy Israeli/Ukrainian citizen that has been sponsoring the neo-Nazis-infested battalions fighting the east Ukraine federalists.

@Kiza [somehow this got mixed up by the mobile version of the website: I have a separate reply for I.f.f.U]"I agree with you that Australia is a nation of tribes". That seems to be another example of your consciously and unconscientiously or unconsciously putting words and ideas into another's mouth to suit some purpose because I don't think that was a fair summary of what I said. But my comment is possibly provoked by not knowing what your purpose might be.

Like the word "coup" "a nation of tribes" could be neutral or, perhaps more likely, affectionately as when joking about some local or traditional support for sporting teams or making jokes about Glaswegians in Edinburgh. But that is not likely in the present context so I wonder why you chose that expression. Although I live close to very large sporting and entertainment complexes where tens, if not hundreds, of thousands of people pass my front gate on foot nearly every week I don't claim to have a bead on the pulse of opinion as the convener of focus groups might have. My impression is that the only substantially separate (partly) "tribal" group are a few tens of thousands of Muslims. Otherwise my impression is that every wave of immigrants, very much including Indians and Chinese and even extending to those few who identify as Aborigines for non-financial reasons and have not destroyed their brains with petrol sniffing are all very much of the same tribe of pleased to be Anglophone citizens of a very lucky country. Of course that is not enough for many people so they work up various distinctions like their superior sensitivity or feelings of shame about "climate change", asylum seekers arriving by boat, failures of Aboriginal policies etc. That does not create what most people would call tribalism.

Of course you are nonetheless right that the tendency of the MSM would be to reinforce their adherence to currently fashionable if superficial views on most matters. Like me on the Ukraine I think they would be right to invest little of their time and mental firepower on becoming more expert than whoever they normally read or listen to on most subjects that agitate people on most blogs. Not being able to do anything about something which, anyway, is not very likely to make a critical difference to one's welfare is a pretty good reason for a rational person's indifference to the possibility of some great conspiracies beyond the usual run of petty corruption. An argument can be made that Australia has looked after its own interests pretty effectively starting with Menzies resisting British pressure to overcommit in Malaysia and against Indonesia, slipping when Australia introduced conscription and sent troops to Vietnam and not just ships, planes and advisers. (Even so, it was part of a policy strongly supported by Malaysia, Singapore, Korea and Japan to keep the US involved in resisting Communism in Asia which cannot be said to be stupid). Then Australia's contribution to the misbegotten Iraq war cost just one private soldier dead. He shot himself in his bunk room. With a Muslim country with 9 or 10 times Australia's population next door it clearly makes sense to pay some insurance premiums. For providing satellite tracking facilities that cost it nothing and sharing its (mostly) sigint Australia gets access to vast amounts of intelligence available from the US. It is also pretty well free of restrictions on access to the most sophisticated weapons and other equipment for armed forces which matters when it couldn't possibly afford total self-reliance.

I am increasungly torn between liking and admiration for Americans I know, their self-organisation and even institutions, plus the pleasure I get from my visits to America, and the extraordinary rottenness, dysfunction and almost corrupt extravagance (as in health costs) that I also see. Maybe Wall Street deserves to be demonised for the callousness, cynicism and incompetence which finally proved disastrous while producing a good proportion of the 0.01 and 0.1 per cent who it is hard to believe gave value for the money they made. But the health care industry (which I am content to judge by comparing its world leading expense with its near Third World results) is worsted by a legal system where the incentives seem to me all wrong and the results appalling in terms of both cost, justice and the utilitarian outcomes for human lives.

What kind of deficiency in me is the made me fail to see the obvious!?

When you are a N.l.r.i.f.f.U you may see why suspicion and f.U warped my mind in the direction of over complication of which one old friend is inclined to accuse me. But one doesn't forget another friend who said he was aiming to buy the personalised car number plate FU2... I suppose it stuck in my head.

A gentleman comes to a restaurant and tells the waiter:--- Make me strong with wine-cakes, let me be comforted with apples; I am overcome with love.*)--- More concrete (more particular)?--- 100 gram of vodka and marinated pickle.

A gentleman comes to a restaurant and tells the waiter:
— Make me strong with wine-cakes, let me be comforted with apples; I am overcome with love.*)
— More concrete (more particular)?
— 100 gram of vodka and marinated pickle.

Oh I wasn't thinking of much more than your phrase reminded me of the phrase from the Bible. I had to do a search to find the chapter and verse for it. The phrase might be in the back of my mind because it inspired the title of a Canadian novel that was taught in high school when I went through the system: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/As_for_Me_and_My_House

I have no idea if it's still taught, let alone what it could possibly mean to the latest crop of "new Canadians" in the classroom.

A gentleman comes to a restaurant and tells the waiter:--- Make me strong with wine-cakes, let me be comforted with apples; I am overcome with love.*)--- More concrete (more particular)?--- 100 gram of vodka and marinated pickle.

Oh I wasn’t thinking of much more than your phrase reminded me of the phrase from the Bible. I had to do a search to find the chapter and verse for it. The phrase might be in the back of my mind because it inspired the title of a Canadian novel that was taught in high school when I went through the system: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/As_for_Me_and_My_House

I have no idea if it’s still taught, let alone what it could possibly mean to the latest crop of “new Canadians” in the classroom.

I.f.f.U. stands for "Immigrant from former USSR", just abbreviation, nothing deeper than that. As for me and my family, we immigrated to USA.

[somehow this got mixed up by the mobile version of the website: I have a separate reply for I.f.f.U]“I agree with you that Australia is a nation of tribes”. That seems to be another example of your consciously and unconscientiously or unconsciously putting words and ideas into another’s mouth to suit some purpose because I don’t think that was a fair summary of what I said. But my comment is possibly provoked by not knowing what your purpose might be.

Like the word “coup” “a nation of tribes” could be neutral or, perhaps more likely, affectionately as when joking about some local or traditional support for sporting teams or making jokes about Glaswegians in Edinburgh. But that is not likely in the present context so I wonder why you chose that expression. Although I live close to very large sporting and entertainment complexes where tens, if not hundreds, of thousands of people pass my front gate on foot nearly every week I don’t claim to have a bead on the pulse of opinion as the convener of focus groups might have. My impression is that the only substantially separate (partly) “tribal” group are a few tens of thousands of Muslims. Otherwise my impression is that every wave of immigrants, very much including Indians and Chinese and even extending to those few who identify as Aborigines for non-financial reasons and have not destroyed their brains with petrol sniffing are all very much of the same tribe of pleased to be Anglophone citizens of a very lucky country. Of course that is not enough for many people so they work up various distinctions like their superior sensitivity or feelings of shame about “climate change”, asylum seekers arriving by boat, failures of Aboriginal policies etc. That does not create what most people would call tribalism.

Of course you are nonetheless right that the tendency of the MSM would be to reinforce their adherence to currently fashionable if superficial views on most matters. Like me on the Ukraine I think they would be right to invest little of their time and mental firepower on becoming more expert than whoever they normally read or listen to on most subjects that agitate people on most blogs. Not being able to do anything about something which, anyway, is not very likely to make a critical difference to one’s welfare is a pretty good reason for a rational person’s indifference to the possibility of some great conspiracies beyond the usual run of petty corruption. An argument can be made that Australia has looked after its own interests pretty effectively starting with Menzies resisting British pressure to overcommit in Malaysia and against Indonesia, slipping when Australia introduced conscription and sent troops to Vietnam and not just ships, planes and advisers. (Even so, it was part of a policy strongly supported by Malaysia, Singapore, Korea and Japan to keep the US involved in resisting Communism in Asia which cannot be said to be stupid). Then Australia’s contribution to the misbegotten Iraq war cost just one private soldier dead. He shot himself in his bunk room. With a Muslim country with 9 or 10 times Australia’s population next door it clearly makes sense to pay some insurance premiums. For providing satellite tracking facilities that cost it nothing and sharing its (mostly) sigint Australia gets access to vast amounts of intelligence available from the US. It is also pretty well free of restrictions on access to the most sophisticated weapons and other equipment for armed forces which matters when it couldn’t possibly afford total self-reliance.

I am increasungly torn between liking and admiration for Americans I know, their self-organisation and even institutions, plus the pleasure I get from my visits to America, and the extraordinary rottenness, dysfunction and almost corrupt extravagance (as in health costs) that I also see. Maybe Wall Street deserves to be demonised for the callousness, cynicism and incompetence which finally proved disastrous while producing a good proportion of the 0.01 and 0.1 per cent who it is hard to believe gave value for the money they made. But the health care industry (which I am content to judge by comparing its world leading expense with its near Third World results) is worsted by a legal system where the incentives seem to me all wrong and the results appalling in terms of both cost, justice and the utilitarian outcomes for human lives.

I.f.f.U. stands for "Immigrant from former USSR", just abbreviation, nothing deeper than that. As for me and my family, we immigrated to USA.

What kind of deficiency in me is the made me fail to see the obvious!?

When you are a N.l.r.i.f.f.U you may see why suspicion and f.U warped my mind in the direction of over complication of which one old friend is inclined to accuse me. But one doesn’t forget another friend who said he was aiming to buy the personalised car number plate FU2… I suppose it stuck in my head.

"Given that people’s ways of understanding things are often set early and remarkably resistant to evidence even for intelligent people..."
This is a nice observation and a valid generalization. A few others are good too.

Other than this, you may have misunderstood my point about Anglo-Jewish oligarchy. Naturally, there are many Jews and many Anglos who oppose such oligarchy and are equally its victims as you and I. This oligarchy is of only one race - the race of nutcases.

People who are their employees (US Government, the Senate and the Congress) all suffer from the Group Think, whilst the general population has no idea what is going on. I do believe that there could even be a revolution because these nut cases are gambling with the fate of all of us by playing an extremely dangerous game of nuclear brinkmanship, a.k.a. nuclear chicken. They are very, very rich and very, very powerful (control a lot of resources), but I simply do not believe that those nutcases are competent enough to avoid causing a nuclear war that they keep playing with.

Even if they do not, I do not want them to be taking such risk and for what?

Thank you for the elucidation especially about “Anglo-Jewish oligarchy”. If I may say so it is an unfortunate expression – approximately 90 per cent over compressed if you didn’t want people to think it the words of one of the great conspiracy theorists whom one can hear adding “well we all know don’t we”to every second barmy utterance.

However free from tribal feeling and opinion many Jews are you could indeed say that there is a Jewish tribe well beyond Israel though I would heavily qualify any adverse implications of this by noting how readily we slip into tribal mode for part of our persona. Just consider how lawyers who are fierce critics of the legal system will pull on that tribal persona when ignorant laymen make unfair or ill-informed criticisms. It has occurred to me that non-Jews have helped create and reinforce Jewish tribalism and that it may be true to say now that there was never a Palestinian nation, or even people, but that Zionism, or Israel has created one.

But you were focusing on the nutcases rather than the innocent instinctive tribals. There was a multi-millionaire anti gay old man who was offering financial support for candidates to become Illinois’ or Chicago’s State Attorney in “The Good Wife”. I think he was meant to evoke the feelings you would regard as appropriate for some of the rich American buyers of influence for Israel. A nutter who could afford to indulge his nutty whims.

A couple of years ago I was cheerfully told by a biofuels lobbyist in DC that it was her job to make sure that Congressmen didn’t have to spend MORE than 90 per cent of their time raising money. Entirely consistent with your thesis because neither the National Rifle Association, nor the Israel lobby would have to own all the members of Congress. What is more, now that SCOTUS has allowed money to be used almost unchecked, it can be so easily used efficiently by merely threatening to support an opposing candidate in the primaries. And there are no doubt many more sophisticated tricks than I know about.

I am a good deal closer to worrying about dysfunction in American government (in many ways at all levels) than anything to do with the Ukraine. As for Israel I concede that there are dangers that unnecessary and unintelligent support for its more belligerent politicians could lead to. But I regard the likelihood of disaster as manageably small even by an Administration with belligerent well-financed warmongering critics – on which lengthily arguable proposition I shall have to defer my half thought out reasons. Let me divert into the speculative.

What if the evangelicals were no longer reliably pro-Israel whatever it does? That’s a lot of votes.

And isn’t it significant that oil states which are at least as rich as America’s Jewish rich haven’t bought equal influence? In the immediate context of what appears to be your concern about a nuclear war based on Israel’s view of the danger from Iran I suppose the answer is obvious. The Arabs, particularly Sunni, wouldn’t mind at all if Israel or the US did significant damage to Iran… (thinking to be continued: I am happy to repeat my earlier post to the effect that what made sense to me was the kind of deal Obama seems to be seeking backed by making the Iranians believe that the first verbal or physical evidences of their having a nuclear weapon would be met with bombing so destructive that no nuclear related facilities would survive regardless of the collateral damage).

What kind of deficiency in me is the made me fail to see the obvious!?

When you are a N.l.r.i.f.f.U you may see why suspicion and f.U warped my mind in the direction of over complication of which one old friend is inclined to accuse me. But one doesn't forget another friend who said he was aiming to buy the personalised car number plate FU2... I suppose it stuck in my head.

Wiz of Oz: "It doesn’t help your credibility that you obviously know nothing about Late Night Live ..."

Fantastic.

So you firmly reject what your ears heard when Mrs. Nuland-Kagan from the US State Department had been selecting a "democratically elected" oligarch in Ukraine, and you firmly reject what your eyes saw what happened in Odessa when neo-Nazis made modern-day auto da fe to burn the pro-federalists alive (the Ukrainian neo-Nazis are cordially supported by Ukrainian diaspora that includes progeny of the former Nazi collaborators) .https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=inpRs9D4u-A

Was you close friend a recipient of the US State Dept. largesse (see $5bln. doled to Ukrainian NGO and such) or is he into finances (IMF, austerity, the "disappeared" Ukrainian gold reserve) or mineral resources acquisitions (Biden and Co, Monsanto, and other delectable names)? http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-11-18/ukraine-admits-its-gold-gone

I refer to your mention of the Australian Broadcasting Corporation’s “Late Night Live” and make the assumption that you might want to know more about it. I am about to provide more information to Kiza who seemed to include it in his scoff about Australians being brainwashed by the MSM.

@KizaMore on ABC Radio National's Late Night Live so that when you generalise about the Australian media you will be more fully informed. As usual Phillip Adams (who apparently has the biggest of all ABC radio audiences (including international and podcasts and the repeats at 4 pm the next day) was aiming for something different - more so than when he had the Russian speaking Englishman talking about the Ukraine. Last night another English journalist talked explicitly about avoiding the MSM view of Mediterranean ex Africa and other immigration. Alex Perry said it was not just a sad humanitarian issue or one about order on the streets of Italy type policing. The big story he said in detail was the multi billion dollar business of organised crime in Africa and Italy which Italy had reason to be ambivalent about because the immigrants aim was rarely to stay in Italy for obvious reasons at present.

I refer to your mention of the Australian Broadcasting Corporation's "Late Night Live" and make the assumption that you might want to know more about it. I am about to provide more information to Kiza who seemed to include it in his scoff about Australians being brainwashed by the MSM.

More on ABC Radio National’s Late Night Live so that when you generalise about the Australian media you will be more fully informed. As usual Phillip Adams (who apparently has the biggest of all ABC radio audiences (including international and podcasts and the repeats at 4 pm the next day) was aiming for something different – more so than when he had the Russian speaking Englishman talking about the Ukraine. Last night another English journalist talked explicitly about avoiding the MSM view of Mediterranean ex Africa and other immigration. Alex Perry said it was not just a sad humanitarian issue or one about order on the streets of Italy type policing. The big story he said in detail was the multi billion dollar business of organised crime in Africa and Italy which Italy had reason to be ambivalent about because the immigrants aim was rarely to stay in Italy for obvious reasons at present.

Today I attended a multi purpose fund raising lunch at which John Howard was guest speaker and there too not by chance to sign his latest book "The Age of Menzies" which was given as de facto reward for our donations. (Menzies was as you would know the only PM to serve longer than Howard). Two of the speakers had been on the board of the ABC and lamented their failure to do anything anout its Green/left culture. The four senior journalists/op-ed writers who were present were all Murdoch employees. No one was there from Fairfax or the ABC. (Almost the opposite of the birthday party I went to two months ago for a very spry 90 year old who had held a major ambassadorship under a Labor government!). Last Monday's "Q & A" on ABC TV 1 was reported as a shocker. The audience was picked so that some transgender campaigner who got up to criticise a panellist who had deplored the fact that young women were being sucked into Islamic State's dystopia was widely applauded. I filter out what I don't like about the ABC but I think I would be with those who say that it is any less left of centre than it used to be. That of course has to be understood in the context of even the former Comms like Mark Aarons and Phillip Adams understanding that the Soviet Union wasn't well governed. (To be fair PA dropped out as an 18 year old in the testing year of 1956 or just after - and then made a fortune in advertising).

@KizaMore on ABC Radio National's Late Night Live so that when you generalise about the Australian media you will be more fully informed. As usual Phillip Adams (who apparently has the biggest of all ABC radio audiences (including international and podcasts and the repeats at 4 pm the next day) was aiming for something different - more so than when he had the Russian speaking Englishman talking about the Ukraine. Last night another English journalist talked explicitly about avoiding the MSM view of Mediterranean ex Africa and other immigration. Alex Perry said it was not just a sad humanitarian issue or one about order on the streets of Italy type policing. The big story he said in detail was the multi billion dollar business of organised crime in Africa and Italy which Italy had reason to be ambivalent about because the immigrants aim was rarely to stay in Italy for obvious reasons at present.

Today I attended a multi purpose fund raising lunch at which John Howard was guest speaker and there too not by chance to sign his latest book “The Age of Menzies” which was given as de facto reward for our donations. (Menzies was as you would know the only PM to serve longer than Howard). Two of the speakers had been on the board of the ABC and lamented their failure to do anything anout its Green/left culture. The four senior journalists/op-ed writers who were present were all Murdoch employees. No one was there from Fairfax or the ABC. (Almost the opposite of the birthday party I went to two months ago for a very spry 90 year old who had held a major ambassadorship under a Labor government!). Last Monday’s “Q & A” on ABC TV 1 was reported as a shocker. The audience was picked so that some transgender campaigner who got up to criticise a panellist who had deplored the fact that young women were being sucked into Islamic State’s dystopia was widely applauded. I filter out what I don’t like about the ABC but I think I would be with those who say that it is any less left of centre than it used to be. That of course has to be understood in the context of even the former Comms like Mark Aarons and Phillip Adams understanding that the Soviet Union wasn’t well governed. (To be fair PA dropped out as an 18 year old in the testing year of 1956 or just after – and then made a fortune in advertising).

There’s a very interesting 12min interview at YouTube with a former classmate of Vladimir Putin who’s now living in the rebel area of Donbass. Kazzura has one version, with her typically chatty and charming subtitles and there’s the original with English subtitles as well. They’re at YouTube as: “[eng subs] Putin’s childhood friend, now living in Gorlovka: “RF has betrayed us, UA leave us alone” ” and “Я дружил с Путиным” at the account of Анатолий Шарий respectively.

“The word decadence, which at first meant simply “decline” in an abstract sense, is now most often used to refer to a perceived decay in standards, morals, dignity, religious faith, or skill at governing among the members of the elite of a very large social structure, such as an empire or nation state.”

The neocons think they can rule the world by force of arms. They think it’s a great idea. Only in a society in the final stages of decadence and decline could such a blatantly stupid idea gain currency. The mere existence of neocon influence in imperial Washington signals the end of the Anglo/Zionist Empire. The whole world is walking on eggshells not wanting to attract the attention of the insane dying beast. I am an American pensioner. I will likely perish in the rubble of collapsing empire. Yet I welcome it as do all sentient beings.

“To understand Washington, go online and read the neoconservative documents and position papers. You will see an agenda unconstrained by law, by morality, by compassion, by common sense. You will see an agenda of evil.”

Bravo! Well and simply said. And it follows that any administration tainted by these scum is in the service of evil. If mass murder is not evil then the word has no meaning.